Reflective Blog Post 1

Between the Sophist, Aristotle and Plato, in terms of rhetoric, I would say I fall more align with the views of Plato. While I know many people found his views illogical, I believe his take was just different and misunderstood by the masses. Plato believed that “transcendent truth exists and is accessible to human beings” (Plato Intro, 2). His concept of concerning rhetoric with morality is so important to society, especially today. Most people don’t make decisions based off feelings anymore. They allow the perceivable mass to let only a logical approach be taken when deciding anything whether politically or socially. And while I not saying logic shouldn’t be used, I am saying we should have other factors that play a role in how we determine a decision or certain situation when regarding life.

This is my main issue with the Sophists; they only use logic, which is pretty illogical if you think about it. They are only “concerned merely with the manipulative aspects of how humans acquire knowledge – that is, with how people could be persuaded that they had learned the truth, whether or not truth was in fact conveyed” (Plato Intro, 2). In other words, they believe using knowledge to get what one wants, whether moral or not, is okay because every man should use the power of language to their advantage. I can’t see how that is right. We shouldn’t trick others into doing what we want or manipulate a mass to appeal to a concept we have no intent of seeing through in the first place. Using language is a privilege and we shouldn’t abuse the power that comes with it.

In terms of Aristotle he believed that only scientific demonstration and analysis of formal logic can help us arrive at absolute truth (Aristotle-the-Rhetoric.pptx, 5). While I believe this is one way to gain truth I still think Plato’s take on morality and trying to find absolute truth through being a good person is most important.