Reflective Blog Post #1

After reading Gorgias/the sophists, Plato, and now Aristotle, I think it is still difficult to decide which theorists approach aligns most with how I am beginning to define rhetoric for myself. As I have learned throughout the readings we have had so far, rhetoric is extremely ambiguous and difficult to define. Although all of the theorists we have read so far define rhetoric differently I think that all of them provide little key things that are essential in defining rhetoric. One of the theorists I did not resonate the most with was the Sophists. I think the Sophists present a strong argument to back up their assertions; however, I do believe that their arguments present more room for objections then anything. I just can not agree with the claim that individuals main motive in rhetoric is to understand how individuals are manipulated through the use of language. All of the theorists present good arguments behind their proposals, but the one definition I resonate the most with Plato and Aristotle's perception of rhetoric. Plato defines the philosopher's task "as aiding others to remember by clearing away the worldly debris that obscures the truth, or, to use the metaphor Socrates advances Plato's Theaetetus, the philosopher is a midwife who aids the other mind to bring forth those ideas hidden in it secret places before its own birth" (Plato, 55). I really liked this idea that Plato presented, how it is essentially not possible for one to obtain knowledge without help from others who have aided them in the journey to cultivate said knowledge. This idea that Plato presents does not compare to any of the other theorists so far, and even though it is not presented through other lenses I do believe there is a strong case behind its meaning. Aristotle's reading was the most interesting of the three so far. Aristotle and Plato had some differences in their theories; however, they also shared many similarities. For Aristotle, "only scientific demonstration and the analysis of formal logic can arrive at transcendent truth, or what Plato would call knowledge"(Aristotle, 144). I believe that Aristotle's argument is one of the strongest so far because he presents a detailed rhetorical theory that is constructed into a hierarchy. His break down of his analysis to understanding rhetoric and how it functions makes it the most appealing of all the theorists' propositions.