According to Masami Kinoshita, the tone of the accusation by Plato against rhetoric is very rough - especially in the Gorgias - and it seems thoroughly denied.But in Phaedrus it is treated rather gently and Plato recognized some value of it. How should this difference be explained? The standard story is that in Gorgias, Plato criticized only the orators' rhetoric, not the rhetoric per se; in Phaedrus he reconstructed the rhetoric as it should be by basing it on philosophy. This interpretation implies that Plato's positions in these dialogues are consistent. But in order to decide whether or not Plato changed his attitude to rhetoric, it is necessary to see whether the ethical attack developed in Gorgias is applied to the philosophical rhetoric or not.
In fact, Kinoshita attempts to make clear the difference between the Plato's philosophical rhetoric and the orators' rhetoric and to demonstrate that in Phaedrus Plato did change his estimation of rhetoric and made a concession to the orators.
Download ebooks on http://www.frenchtheory.com/
See that post with different algorithms in metabole
See the journal French Metablog with today different posts
Enter Hypertextual as a member
