You can fish for a man and feed him for a day. Or you can teach a man how to fish and he can feed himself for life. The latter part of this statement describes why many educational institutions existing today are shaped as Socratic seminars. The educator wants to challenge his or her disciples to critically analyze the matter of discussion, allowing him or her to think out of the box and come up with answers on their own. The Socratic seminar method is designed to prepare students for the big test, the test of living in the “real world.” Socrates, who designed this Socratic seminar, passed this legacy on to his own disciple, Plato, who then passed it on to his student, Aristotle.
A student of Socrates, Plato, is an ancient Greek philosopher that was born in Athens around 428 BCE. Upon coming across Socrates, Plato realized that Socrates was his mentor. Plato quickly grasped many of the techniques used by Socrates whether that be his philosophy or his manners of debate, which is clearly evident in most of his writing. Plato created his drama, Phaedrus, in approximately 370 BC. It is considered one of his significant works because he wrote this in his transition period where he was solidifying his own philosophies yet the voice of Socrates was underlying in the background.
The disciple of Plato, Aristotle, is also one of the most well-known ancient philosophers. He was born in 384 BCE in Stagira, which is an island in Greece. Aristotle is recognized for creating the foundations of Western philosophy which exist today. One of his most popular writings, Rhetoric, is considered one of the greatest works on the art of persuasion. Written between 367 to 322 BC, this work was especially important to Aristotle because along with logic and dialectic, he considers rhetoric the third main element to philosophy.
In both the Rhetoric and Phardeus, the theme of the art of rhetoric is ongoing throughout the writings. Looking specifically at Plato’s work, one of his main principles is that one should, first, establish a strong connection with the truth and the self, or soul. He or she must realize what may be beneficial or harmful for the soul, and this should guide his or her behaviors.
Until a man knows the truth of the several particulars of which he is writing or speaking, and is able to define them as they are, and having defined them again to divide them until they can be no longer divided, and until in like manner he is able to discern the nature of the soul, and discover the different modes of discourse which are adapted to different natures, and to arrange and dispose them in such a way that the simple form of speech may be addressed to the simpler nature, and the complex and composite to the more complex nature—until he has accomplished all this, he will be unable to handle arguments according to rulesof art, as far as their nature allows them to be subjected to art, either for the purpose of teaching or persuading (Phaedrus, pg 16).
But the question naturally remains, what is truly the art of persuasion and what is the best way to persuade? Like in almost every branch of academia, there is debate on which method is most rooted, scientific, and useful for modern times. The same is especially true for this portion of the Rhetoric, which Aristotle begins by explaining the difference between two methods of persuasion–rhetoric and dialectic. Rhetoric is the art of persuasive writing and thinking, without engaging one’s emotions, as they tend to cloud one’s judgement. Dialectic is the art of persuasion through intense investigation and discussion. Both methods have their strengths and weaknesses, but Aristotle chooses to expand on rhetoric.
Rhetoric may be defined as the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion. This is not a function of any other art. Every other art can instruct or persuade about its own particular subject-matter; for instance, medicine about what is healthy and unhealthy, geometry about the properties of magnitudes, arithmetic about numbers, and the same is true of other arts and sciences. But rhetoric we look upon as the power of observing the means of persuasion on almost any subject presented to us; and that is why we say that, in its technical character, it is not concerned with any special or definite class of subjects (Rhetoric, Ch. 2, Book 1).
According to Aristotle, rhetoric is useful for four key reasons. First, rhetoric is based entirely on truth and facts alone, and therefore, naturally “prevail over their opposites” (Ch 1, Book 1). Second, only “notions possessed by everybody”, (Ch 1, Book 1) are used. Third, the persuader is so clear on the facts, that he or she is able to utilize them being on either side of the question, as long as people are not being persuaded wrongly. Fourth, one’s speech is always held in highest regard because it is one of the greatest powers that one possesses. Therefore, one should never use their speech wrongly, as it can bring the greatest of benefits when used rightly, but also cause great harm when used wrongly. Therefore, because an extreme notion of respect is kept at the forefront of persuasion, Aristotle believes rhetoric to be most useful.
However, of the many methods of persuasion, “some belong strictly to the art of rhetoric and some do not” (Ch 2, Book 1). Before a person begins employing a method of persuasion, Aristotle shares that he must have (1) character that deems his speech respect and credibility, (2) emotions to engage his audience, and (3) proving the truth through persuasively using arguments. Ultimately, Aristotle states very clearly, that regardless of which method of persuasion one utilizes, the reasoning must be very logical, human character must be taken into consideration, and human emotions must be understood.
The breadth of logical reasoning, and the extent of explanation helped me to realize how debate, reasoning, and persuasion is not only an art, but also a science. One must not only consider the actual subject at question, but also each of the parties involved, their nature, and how to best reach their soul through careful crafting of the facts. I learned how Aristotle stressed that the power of words is as strong as one’s physical power. Therefore, one must choose their every word wisely, and must be a powerful communicator. I feel this is extremely vital today, in a world that is increasingly interconnected, and considered by many to be “flat”. Unfortunately, however, we have lost strength in our communication, and instead choose to relay messages only via technological advances. Perhaps additional examples throughout this article would help the common reader better understand Aristotle’s message, and would try to implement in his or her daily life.