Thoughts on Gorgias

The Gorgias took all of my concentration because I had yet to ask myself the question; are there different types of rhetoric? And if so, how does one categorize them? I had not before thought that there is a rhetoric that uses the basis of belief and another that uses knowledge. Presented in the reading was the thought that the “persuader and persuaded come to resemble one another” (Bizzell, Hertzberg 84). My take on that was that since there is a type of rhetoric that persuades by focusing on belief, eventually the persuader is going to believe what they are trying to persuade. They may get so caught up in their own game of persuasion they forget the non-convoluted point they are going after.

              

     On the other hand there is this idea of the ‘true rhetor’ who strips the human back to bare essence. Socrates thought something interesting. That an individual should take a look at what makes a human tick in order to fully adapt his method of rhetoric to that person.

  

The emphasis on the human base is truly fascinating and led me to think about what a human base is and if knowledge or belief is part of. I think that knowledge is the only base in this situation. We are naturally curious creatures who constantly strive for competition and to seek knowledge. Intrigue is an instinct that drives all humans to progress and to lure knowledge out of the world. Based on the facts we perceive as true we formulate and contour our own belief system that in which we use as moral guidelines to make decisions.

So, in relation to this reading I would have to think that Socrates had the better point. It is easy to persuade someone by telling them things they want to hear based on their belief system, but when we look past that and appeal to their thirst for knowledge, that is when true believers form. If you add to the knowledge they have, then they will change their opinions accordingly.

                

     There are some commercials that appeal to the viewer by shoving facts in large font into their faces but the ones that I pay attention to in particular are the ones that show compared facts. When they place a statistic from their product next to another one it allows my brain to understand that there is a discrepancy. The commercial is appealing to my knowledge of the product directly. I am more likely to change my belief surrounding the product if I am presented with an alternative, whether it is good or bad I base my ideas off of what the information is telling me.

              

    Overall, I think that this reading has allowed me to think a little more about how rhetoric really appeals to the person and how different people view it in different ways. To some there is a thought that there is a right way of approaching rhetoric and to others it all falls into a similar category.