Rhetoric
I like Plato's opinion of Rhetoric/Sophistics if I am undertanding it correctly. I think what he believed was that Sophists were the types to "say what people wanted to hear, not what was true". I just can't believe that Socrates, his teacher, was sentanced to death for being accused of this. Even if the accusations were true, why was he at fault when anyone in his audience had the choice of forming their own views/opinions on whatever the topic of discussion was. Imagine what Plato or some of the others of that time would think of politicians today!
posted by angelina @ 7:57 p.m.
1 Comments:
I think it is wrong to use rhetorics in the judical system, or to go on lawyers leash as they build their cases using rhetoric, as the judge or the jury must use dialectic thought to analyze what the lawyer is saying otherwise the lawyer could just say something that may sound well but may as well be complete bs. It would be dumb to just let the lawyer build his case on rhetorics, as his skill to talk very well does not mean that the felon is actually not at guilt. Therefore i do not think that current judical system is built upon rhetorics, because that would be stupid and disapointing. Our current day judical system is built upon many laws and the only way a lawyer could win a case even if the felon is at guilt is by manipulating the laws in his favour. Not just rhetoric.
Joanna i cannot really see how this article relates to relativism, i mean what opinions must we consider when reading this article? Its just that in the past people didnt have as much knowledge as we do today and so they couldnt really tell rhetoric from actual truth as they had no idea of dialectic thought. There is no opinions there, there is pretty speech developed by Sophists which could might as well be lies and the dialectic mind which analyzes and figures out the truth, i really do not see the metter of opinion here. maybe I just dont understand what you are trying to say...
Post a Comment
<< Home