Rhetorical questions, rhetorical answers

Through its developed search for the definition of rhetoric and the questioning of art, and amidst its constant shift in discussions of power in reference to persuasion, Plato’s Gorgias closes with an unapologetic Socrates engaged in lonely argument with himself. The work features question upon question, with few concrete answers given in return.

It seems Socrates asks questions that he indeed 1) already knows the answers to but is asking anyway with the goal of questioning the knowledge of the respondent or provoking additional debate, or 2) has foreshadowed the respondent’s answer of which will in turn provide an outlet for his following practiced thought. Here are several examples of this practice:

SOC.: And for all the other arts that we were just now talking about, we shall be able to show

that they are craftsmen of persuasion, and what the persuasion is, and about what, won’t we?

POL.: Yes. (35)

SOC.: Weren’t you saying that suffering injustice is worse, but doing injustice is more shameful?

POL.: I was. (61)

SOC.: Aren’t you saying that the more intelligent man is superior? Say yes or no.

POL.: I am. (82)

SOC.: Now tell me: do you mean something such as to be hungry and, being hungry to eat?

POL.: I do. (87)

In each of these examples, Socrates begins a series of questions that egg on or frustrate Gorgias and/or his students; he is a pusher and a persuader (so some believe). This tactic does not go over well with his participants, thus he begins to lose them one-by-one. James Kastely writes of this in his In Defense of Plato’s Gorgias. Kately writes: “Early in the dialogue, Socrates addresses this point by explaining that he will continue to ask questions and pursue a dialectical form of discourse even though he has a good idea of what Gorgias’s answers might be” (98). To Socrates, I send the following video:

This clip could express those feelings of Callicles and Polus (for it certainly did mine). Kastely provides reasoning for my distaste with the following lines: “Those who object to the dialogue take their dissatisfaction with it at face value and do not consider that part of Gorgias’s rhetorical strategy might be to provoke dissatisfaction and, further, that this provocation might be essential to Plato’s understanding of the philosophical importance of rhetoric” (97).

In the end, it is Gorgias who compels Socrates to complete his argument: “I, myself, in any case, wish to hear you go through the remaining things by yourself” (104). Socrates adheres to the request and thus begins a lengthy, concluding argument with himself. Socrates is demanding with his speech even after Callicles announces that he is not persuaded by Socrates’ words.

SOC.: Can it be that, as you enter upon the city’s business, you will then take care of anything else for us but that we citizens be as good as possible? Or have we not agreed many times already that the political man must do this? Have we agreed or not? Answer! We have agreed—I shall answer for you… (114)

This idea of arguing with oneself cannot be better described than through the following video. Jeff Dunham, a well-know ventriloquist, makes a living doing essentially that which Socrates does to conclude Plato’s work. (Note: Pardon the crude comments and explicit references… it’s a Jeff Dunham trademark.)

From this video, not only do viewers see this concept of one man literally arguing with himself as he portrays other characters and their respective thoughts (similar to Socrates), but they, too, get a sense of the idea of power with the character Peanut. Peanut is forceful and demanding in his exchanges with Jose the Jalapeno (on a stick) and viewers witness the so-to-speak bickering of which Socrates and his fellow speakers also engaged.

Sources:

Dunham, Jeff. “Arguing with Myself—Peanut & Jose Jalapeno.” 12 November 2008. YouTube. Accessed on 09 September 2012.

Plato. Gorgias. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 1998. Print.

“Rhetorical Answers.” 29 August 2008. YouTube. Accessed on 09 September 2012.