Midterm Essays

4: Why did the ideas of Socrates, Plato, or Aristotle depend upon the medium or genre through which he communicated?

  

          The medium in which someone presents an idea is often directly related with the information being presented.  An example of this is the Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.  Though not separated by many years, their forms of portraying their rhetoric vary greatly.

            Socrates shared his ideas orally.  His most famous tactic was using the Socratic method—a way of learning himself as well as helping his pupils teach themselves through a series of questions.   This approach allowed him to cater his rhetoric to a specific, small audience.  As far as content is concerned, Socrates was also able to discuss many paradoxical topics—allowing him to essentially talk in circles as he attempted to sort out what was truly ethical.  Not only did Socrates not write down his philosophies, he thought it absolutely unfitting to do so.

            Unfortunately, it is impossible to have a full grasp on what Socrates truly believed, as our current understanding of him was passed to us through the writings of his pupil, Plato.  Unlike his mentor, many of Plato’s ideas were presented in the written form.  While many of their ideas were similar, Plato is well known for more concrete examples and theories—such as The Republic.  Whereas Socrates ideas focused more on exploring, Plato’s medium allowed him to more easily make lasting claims.

            Aristotle proved to be even more exact than his mentor.  Following both the trends of written and oral, Aristotle was known for his large lectures and textbooks.  This medium of transmission allowed him to project to large, more educated audiences.  His style of rhetoric became more technical--encompassing different specific appeals, inventions, and branches of oratory.  The method also helped him in establishing a wide range of disciplines, helping him to become a leader in many of the sciences.

                                                                                                                                 

6: Why does the Funeral Speech of Pericles typify epideictic oratory?  What other function is it serving?

              From the onset on Pericles’ Funeral Oration, it is clear the there are elements of epideictic oratory.  The title itself proclaims the setting of a funeral—a ceremony set in Athens to honor the diseased due to the war.  In this sense, the oration stood as a conclusion to the lives of the soldiers.  It praised them for their valiant efforts.  He states, “These men have shown themselves valiant in action, and it would be enough, I think, for their glories to be proclaimed in action.”  This is a typical example of an epideictic speech.

              Pericles’ oration had more than the praise for the dead in mind.  Pericles used his opportunity to address the public in this type of setting as the means to perpetuate his own desires for reform.  He continues the speech praising his beloved Athens.  Blaming it for false traditions of the past, as well as promoting its positive attributes, Pericles sets the stage for a brighter future—calling those in attendance to action and greater nationalism.  His speech is then transformed into another form of epideictic oratory—that of a commencement speech.  Through letting go of the lost and reigning in the new, Pericles allows this speech to employ the devices of epideictic to establish pathos with the audience and accomplish his purposes.