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.
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.
