Anti-Rhetorical Rhetoric

Parmenides

A Pre-Socratic thinker, Parmenides offered a different type of rhetoric than the Sophists or the rhetoricians who would come after him. Fascinated by physical phenomena, existence, the origin of life, mathematics, and the connection between words and things, the Pre-Socratic philosophers like Parmenides offer anti-rhetorical rhetoric.

On Nature (Peri Physis) is persuasive and purposefully designed, but different from traditional rhetoric in that it is based on premises rather than sophisticated skepticism. The fragments of the remaining poem grapple with nous or “being,” what it means to exist, and the meaningless “non-being.” The poem argues for Truth, Aletheia, that is eternally unchanging.

On a car trip, my friends and I passed the time by creating “Pizza Proverbs.” The borrowed, gold, 1997 minivan escorted six young mortals into the mountains of Tennessee instead of to the path of a Goddess. As I read On Nature, my memory canon chose to recollect this moment of ‘inspired’ creation: “divided, the knowledge of pizza when shared is greater but less” and “the path to pizza and the path to happiness are the same” I’m not sure why exactly On Nature reminds me of this proverbial pizza moment, but perhaps it has to do with my understanding of pizza, the confusing proverbs we created out of that understanding, and my confusion on Parmenides.

How does the lack of true trust create subjective belief in mortals, and is that necessarily a bad thing? “The Way of Objectivity” seems to be a trap. I’m stuck trying to figure out what is not that that I do not know and why that is. I’m troubled by “whatever can be spoken or thought of necessarily is, since it is possible for it to be, but it is not possible for nothing to be.” My hungry friends and I can think and speak of a two ton pizza topped with cheese only unicorns eat and delivered by a legion of fairies, but simply speaking it and thinking it doesn’t (and shouldn’t) make the magical pizza exist. But then again, the existence of the idea and following proverbs in our mind became a real moment between friends—the imagination existed between us.

The descriptions of nature in On Nature, retain beauty even as they’ve been disproven through the millenniums of scientific discovery. The Moon sounds like a superhero in its wandering around the Earth. The thought that the “composition of body parts” is responsible for Thought intrigues me. And if it is the same in each human, than why is this human given all of this so that he might never be outdone by other humans.

Practical Rhetoric

Thucydides

One of the first historians, Thucydides’s writing on the Peloponnesian War includes a speech about civic manners. Though it is not a direct representation of a speech that was offered at Pericle’s funeral, it is an example of practical rhetoric. I find it much more understandable and relatable than Parmenides, but it still stirs my thoughts. Sentences such as, “Mankind are tolerant of the praises of others so long as each hearer thinks that he can do as well or nearly as well himself, but, when the speaker rises above him, jealousy is aroused and he begins to be incredulous” strike me because of its practicality. I find this true (though not at all something I’ve heard spoken in such a way) in the speeches of praise I’ve heard offered today. And though it speaks to military training, viewing education as the undergoing of laborious exercises in order to make youth brave is still a beautifully practical goal of schooling.

I don’t think the author of this speech had a similar “bedside manner” as Naomi Rosenberg (“How to Tell a Mother Her Child is Dead”), yet both offer exquisite examples of dealing with speaking of the dead. Their very specific and thankfully relatively rare practices of rhetoric speak to the entire subject. In Pericle's Funeral Oration, the job of delivering the speech seems a responsibility that is almost dreaded. The emotion is powerfully distant. So the sentence, “I have paid the required tribute, in obedience to the law, making use of such fitting words as I had” makes me realize anew the power of words.

Sophistic “Rhetoric”

Protagoras

The first to exact a fee, distinguish the tenses of the verb, and say that there are two arguments opposed to each other in every issue, Protagoras’s bold statements seem similar in some ways to Parmenides. At least, his statement “man is the measure of all things--of things that are, that they are; of things that are not, that they are not” leaves me just as baffled as Parmenides “whatever can be spoken or thought of necessarily is, since it is possible for it to be, but it is not possible for nothing to be.” Like his thoughts on the gods, I wonder if the obscurity of being and the inherent time limit of life are reason enough for my muddled mind when reading his argument.

Gorgias

Whereas Thucydides’s words increase my value and understand the limits of words, Gorias’s words make me question words all together. Compared to a two-year old who has a very limited understanding of vocabulary, I would say I have a richer experience of the world. But then, it is impossible for me to truly enter the mind of a two-year old. And the statement makes me wonder what the definition of a richer experience of the world entails. Most two-year olds experience the world from innocent newness in which small things delight them as they learn new words and add to their vocabulary. The evidence they provide for their experience is conveyed less through words and more through twinkling eyes and innocent giggles. But then, am I just using my advanced vocabulary and age to project wonder onto the toddler? To answer, I try to think wordlessly and remember what it was like to be two-years old. That memories themselves are often wordless sketches, scenes, and smells that I then describe with words leaves me just as perplexed when answering this question.

Anonymous, Dissoi Logoi: Two-fold or Contrasting Arguments

Good is bad for some people, and good even changes into bad for the same person at different times. In the same way, the concepts of what is shameful and seemly, just and unjust, and true and false mean different things depending on their contexts. In this manner, the presenter of Two-fold or Contrasting Arguments offers two points for common situations. This absolutely makes sense. Context is extremely important, but so often we forget to analyze the two parts of the argument and simply write things familiar to us off as good, just, and true.

Antiphon, The First Tetralogy

The first (perhaps) speechwriter (logographer), Antiphon, wrote for the law courts between 430-425. The set of four speeches offer an example of how one might have practiced for rhetoric in the context of the law. The only Athenian “sophist,” Antiphon’s speech is fitting for the high court it was set in. He argued two sides artfully in the trial for homicide.

Alcidamas, “On the Sophists or Concerning Those Who Write Speeches”

Alcidamas was not a fan of the Sophists. Thinking their pride was unwarranted since they claimed to master all of rhetoric when they only understood a small section (writing), Alcidamas wrote a formal accusation against the sophists.

Believing that writing should only be pursued as a supplemental area, Alcidamas argued that if a life is only devoted to writing then an understanding of rhetoric and philosophy are missed. Thus, the Sophists should just be called poets. Although Alcidamas was not a fan of poets either, thinking the entire written word was condemnable in its ease of access. Because written things have the benefit of time for revising instead of spontaneous response, Alcidamas argues that writing is easier, “He who can lift a heavy burden has no difficulty in raising a light one, but the man of feeble powers cannot carry a heavy load.” Even speeches that are written detract from the brilliant convince-ability of speeches that are given “in truth.” To avoid, “infelicitous, ludicrous and irredeemable embarrassment,” it is better to never look down and thus mess up the reading or performing of a written speech.

I was considering his argument slightly ironic because I’m able to hear Alcidamas’s thoughts all these years later because it was written down instead of just spoken when he addressed that argument. His conclusion leaves no doubt of his stance. To be considered a wise, zealous master, one must only practice writing as an amusing pastime.

I’ve often felt that speaking is more difficult than writing. When I need to have a difficult conversation with someone, I have been known to write drafts of potential streams of conversation so that I do not offend and can truly convey my thoughts. My written words are much more eloquent than my spoken words because revision is indeed a privilege reserved to written words. Plus, my mind just seems more ignited when I have the power of a pen and paper. I’ve wished I was more capable of speaking the first powerfully articulate thing that comes to mind, but wise thoughts would need to readily jump into my mind before I would be able to present them.

In Alcidamas’s accusation, I hear the heralds of angry grandmothers sure that my generation will never be intelligent because we send text messages so often. And just as I understand Alcidamas’s point well, their fear makes sense. But in the same way that his ancient accusation makes me sad, apprehension stirs when I hear the doomful view of my technology-changed age bracket. I adore writing, and I’m even an occasional fan of getting and sending text messages.

Though I see the value in the argument, I think writing is a difficult process that requires wisdom just as speaking well demands a different, but still valuable thought process. When one starts pedestalizing any subject above another, the argument becomes polarizing. While some offensive arguments are indeed necessary (by nature of argumentation not all agree), but in the case of lifting science above art, race above race, gender above gender, or speaking above writing, the celebration of humanity is lost. Instead of glorifying what can be accomplished in unity, setting subjects up in opposition divides. Just because I like writing, and though I will admit occasional jealousy of the great speaker, I hope to celebrate the art both require.

#writing #GreekRhetoric #Parmenides #PracticalRhetoric