Rhetoric, Paideia and the Phaedrus Essay - 3347 Words

Rhetoric, Paideia and the Phaedrus ABSTRACT: Some of the notorious interpretive puzzles of the Phaedrus arise from reading it in terms of a static version of mimesis; hence, the concerns about its apparent failure to enact its own norms and the status of its own self-commentaries. However, if the dialogue is read in the light of the more dynamic model of a perfectionist paideia — that is, Plato’s portrayal of Socrates as attempting to woo Phaedrus to philosophy (with only partial success) is itself a rhetorical attempt to woo the appropriate reader — then many of the puzzles fall into place as part of the rhetorical strategy. The apparent lack of formal unity arises out of Phaedrus’ own deficiencies; the written dialogue turns out†¦show more content†¦Rutherford goes on to propose that the Phaedrus is concerned with a vital choice Phaedrus must make, ... concerned with love — being properly read in part as a conversation-dialogue, presenting the process of Phaedrus turning t o philosophy (1995: p. 248-9); thus we see Socrates as a lover wooing Phaedrus to philosophy. (p. 247) On this account, Socrates enacts in the dialogue the different varieties of good madness expounded in the Palinode (p. 262), and the latter exemplifies the rhetorical and persuasive skills which Socrates requires of the true orator in the second half of the dialogue (p. 257). However, Socrates himself acknowledges (265b) that he has not in fact produced a perfect and uniform work such as that he describes as the ideal, and Rutherford suggests that the same is true of Platos achievement (or deliberate underachievement) in the Phaedrus as a whole. This feature both points to the imperfections of the written word, to the unfinished nature of this, and every, treatment of philosophic themes, and also to the complex and non-simple natures of the participants. (p. 266) Phaedrus himself is complex and divided. We recall that Phaedrus response to the Palinode is principally aesthetic, ... he does not question Socrates about the conclusions he reached (p. 258). So if the second half as a whol e seems to