• Log In

The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android Spotify Google Podcasts audible patreon
  • Home
  • Podcast
    • PEL Network Episodes
    • Publicly Available PEL Episodes
    • Paywalled and Ad-Free Episodes
    • PEL Episodes by Topic
    • Nightcap
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Pretty Much Pop
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • (sub)Text
    • Phi Fic Podcast
    • Combat & Classics
    • Constellary Tales
  • Blog
  • About
    • PEL FAQ
    • Meet PEL
    • About Pretty Much Pop
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • Meet Phi Fic
    • Listener Feedback
    • Links
  • Join
    • Become a Citizen
    • Join Our Mailing List
    • Log In
  • Donate
  • Store
    • Episodes
    • Swag
    • Everything Else
    • Cart
    • Checkout
    • My Account
  • Contact
  • Mailing List

PREVIEW-Episode 69: Plato on Rhetoric vs. Philosophy

January 12, 2013 by Mark Linsenmayer 27 Comments

http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/partiallyexaminedlife/PREVIEW-PEL_ep_069_12-18-12.mp3

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 32:15 — 29.5MB)

This is a short preview of the full episode.

Buy Now Purchase this episode for $2.99. Or become a PEL Citizen for $5 a month, and get access to this and all other paywalled episodes, including 68 back catalogue episodes; exclusive Part 2's for episodes published after September, 2020; and our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more causally.

On Plato's Dialogue, "Gorgias" (380 BCE or so).

Why philosophize? Isn't it better to know how to persuade people in practical matters, like a successful lawyer or business leader? Plato (speaking as usual through Socrates) thinks that the "art" of rhetoric (persuasive speeches) isn't an art at all, in the sense of something that requires an understanding of one's subject matter, but merely a talent for saying what people want to hear. Gorgias (and Socrates's other interlocutors) think that being able to persuade gives you power, so it's awesome, but Plato thinks that unless what you say is likely to improve your audience, then it's worthless. The argument is generalizable to all artistic endeavor: Do the arts aim to just give pleasure, and even if they do, is that bad?

Mark, Seth, Wes, and Dylan kick this one off with some discussion of how we pick topics, and then stroll through the this very entertaining dialogue, which you can also hear us read in "Not Episode 69." We consider Plato's doctrine that knowledge inevitably leads to virtue and his insistence that goods can't contravene each other, so that pleasure over an injustice can't be good just because it's pleasurable, and acting justly must always be in our long-term interest, by definition. We wrap up by joining Socrates in dissing those that would dismiss philosophy as a waste of time. Get the book and read more about the topic.

End song: "Fallen Sun" by New People, from the new album Might Get It Right (written/sung by Matt Ackerman).

Looking for the full Citizen version?

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Filed Under: Podcast Episodes Tagged With: Ethics, philosophy of art, philosophy podcast, Plato, rhetoric, Socrates

Comments

  1. Glen says

    January 13, 2013 at 3:54 am

    Great episode.

    Laughed out loud in agreement with Seth’s tirade over the psych article.

    You might as well read the Communist Manifesto along with the Ideology since it is so short.

    Also, one thing people tend to not realize is how big of a contributor Engels was; his Principles of Communism or the Origin are highly interesting. So if you feel like ever doing Marx’s partner, they’re great reads.

    My biggest request probably would be to do a podcast on anarchism (i.e. Proudhon, Bakunin, Kropotkin, etc.)

    Reply
  2. Khary Tafari Robertson says

    January 13, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    In reference to donations and guest speakers, is it out of the question to donate an organ to get in on the Marx discussion with you guys?

    (This comment is only slightly tongue in cheek)

    Reply
    • Seth Paskin says

      January 13, 2013 at 9:38 pm

      Well, we’re recording tonight, so it’s a bit late, but we can certainly talk about doing a Not School group or a later recording. Send a note with your interest and background to pel@partiallyexaminedlife.com

      Reply
  3. Evan Gould says

    January 15, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    The song was really good. It was a pleasant and cozy feeling making ending.

    Was it Christian themed? I thought I heard something about taking a stand on your knees. Which would go along nicely with all of your 2012 rebirths.

    Reply
    • Mark Linsenmayer says

      January 15, 2013 at 3:51 pm

      Definitely not Christian themed… Just about disappointment.

      Reply
  4. david says

    January 21, 2013 at 1:16 pm

    Seth, you magnificent SOB, I wanted to stand up and cheer when you reached the end of your brilliant denunciation that began around 1:45:30. Thank you for so passionately expressing that. Amen.

    Reply
  5. Lynda OReilly says

    January 22, 2013 at 7:11 am

    Hi, I’m just seconding David’s observation that Seth is a magnificent SOB.
    Seth’s remarks on research, in less than a minute, crystallized the thoughts I’ve been having on the matter for years. Beautiful!

    Reply
  6. Jim says

    January 22, 2013 at 10:49 am

    I certainly think there’s some truth to Seth’s claims regarding research, and I think it highlights a pretty big problem for science, but I think he over-stated his point. Yes, labs often have to compete for funding from outside sources (thus, being “touched by the hand of money”), potentially altering how and what research they conduct. However, I don’t think that necessarily prevents those labs from pursuing truth.

    Maybe I’m naive, but from my experience, there’s a considerable amount of funding that labs can attain that comes with very few strings attached. So if I’m a researcher pursuing funding, I simply limit myself to applying for funding that allows me to pursue truth that mutually benefits the outside funding source. Thus, my virtue remains in tact while pursuing truth. I understand this type of funding can be harder to come by, but it’s definitely possible.

    Am I being way too naive?

    Reply
    • Seth Paskin says

      January 22, 2013 at 12:44 pm

      I don’t think you are being way too naive, but we have to acknowledge that all funding comes from somewhere and that “where” has some agenda (even if it’s “pure” science). My response on the podcast was over-determined by an EconTalk podcast to which I had recently listened about the FDA, drug approval and big pharma. Super-depressing, shocking and like all stories of corruption, hardly acknowledged. Check it out here:

      http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/11/angell_on_big_p.html

      Medicine has only pretension to science, but the funding process is susceptible to corruption across all disciplines. Ultimately, everyone wants personal gain.

      Reply
      • Will Yate says

        January 22, 2013 at 1:05 pm

        Another super-depressing example is economics. Matt Taibbi recently described the scene in the movie “Inside Job” that brought this to my attention. It involved an interview with Glenn Hubbard, the dean of Columbia’s business school:

        “In the movie, renowned filmmaker Charles Ferguson pointed out that, among other things, Hubbard had co-authored a paper with former Goldman chief economist William Dudley in which he praised credit derivatives as having improved the “allocation of risk” and helped produce “enhanced stability.” It was fair to ask how much Goldman’s “Global Markets Institute” had to pay one of the Ivy League’s leading minds to endorse the giant daisy chains of credit default swaps and collateralized debt obligations that led to the crisis – it was quite a coup, after all, like getting the Dean of Harvard Medical School to pose in public smoking a pack of Kools.

        “Anyway, when asked if he did consulting work for big banks, Hubbard refused to answer. And when asked if he just didn’t remember who was writing checks to him when he wasn’t overseeing the education of American youth, he fumed.

        “”This isn’t a deposition, sir,” he hissed. “I was polite enough to give you time, foolishly I now see. Give it your best shot.””

        Reply
    • Daniel Horne says

      January 22, 2013 at 9:00 pm

      Hi Jim,

      While I agree with Seth that you’re not being “way too naive,” it’s good to be aware of all the myriad ways scientists can succumb to bias of some sort, whether acknowledged or unacknowledged. Professional scientists themselves have expressed this kind of skepticism to me. There are other ways in which bias can creep into scientific research as currently practiced, besides the obvious string-pulling from those funding research.

      Simply put, many scientific researchers are rarely pursuing “truth” for its own sake. The nature of the game is such that they are first and foremost pursuing their own career. And certain types of papers tend to promote careers, and other types of papers often don’t. I wrote a half-baked post on this a while back, which you should probably only read for its link to a very good New Yorker article:

      http://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2011/01/14/when-keeping-it-real-goes-wrong/

      Seth linked to a very good EconTalk episode about the outright corruption that can taint scientific research. To my mind, a more devastating–if more nuanced–critique appears in an earlier episode of EconTalk with Brian Nosek. It discusses some of the institutional incentives / disincentives to a truly unbaised approach to “truth,” and leaves you wondering just how much scientific literature can really be relied upon. :

      http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/09/nosek_on_truth.html

      Here’s the blurb from the episode:

      “Brian Nosek of the University of Virginia talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about how incentives in academic life create a tension between truth-seeking and professional advancement. Nosek argues that these incentives create a subconscious bias toward making research decisions in favor of novel results that may not be true, particularly in empirical and experimental work in the social sciences. In the second half of the conversation, Nosek details some practical innovations occurring in the field of psychology, to replicate established results and to publicize unpublished results that are not sufficiently exciting to merit publication but that nevertheless advance understanding and knowledge. These include the Open Science Framework and PsychFileDrawer.”

      Reply
  7. b brock says

    September 2, 2013 at 4:40 pm

    Why doesn’t Plato have Socrates convince Callicles? Does Plato want us to see that Socrates’s position is in some sense just as extreme as Callicles’s? When Socrates reduces Callicles to the admission that the best life is that of a catamite, is it surprising that Callicles considers Socrates’s taunting and disregard for his own safety a position which is just as ridiculous? It seems to me that while Socrates (certainly) and Plato (almost certainly) believe that the good life is not necessarily the pleasant – what is after all easily shown by Socrates over and over again – Plato, unlike Socrates, is presenting a problem to us, not a simple answer for how to live.

    Plato portrays Socrates as a sort of sadist, almost, doesn’t he? Relentlessly running over the argument again and again, disregarding that his flummoxed “friends” nonetheless have no intention to change their profitable ways, portraying Callicles as a pervert, performing a pretend dialogue with the unresponsive Callicles, Socrates is pleasuring himself at the expense of his “strange friends”. He seems to get off more and more the less willing they are to succumb.

    Why doesn’t Plato simply end the dialogue after Gorgias and Polus? Or better yet, Plato could have a reasonable person ask Socrates this: “given the fact of widespread conflict and injustice, and given that while you have shown that we ought to prefer to suffer rather than commit injustices, we still intend to commit rather than suffer them, what society can you imagine which would best develop our souls toward perfection?” (The Republic…) Clearly, a society with only “one true statesman”, in the form of Socrates, is not entirely succeeding given that these very gadfly-stung men are on the verge of putting him to death…

    It seems to me that Plato wants us to see Socrates’s dialectic coming up against Callicles’s stubbornness in order that we ask with Callicles: “And you are the man who cannot speak unless there is some one to answer?”

    Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Is PEL Intro-Friendly? | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    January 17, 2013 at 6:28 am

    […] the beginning of the Gorgias episode, we read a few listener emails. I ended up cutting out a section of that where we responded to this […]

    Reply
  2. Socrates’ Attack on Rhetoric in the “Gorgias” | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    January 19, 2013 at 9:07 pm

    […]  If practiced in the wrong way, that is.  I believe he is wildly off the mark here and in puzzling through this, I came to a better understanding of why I disagree with Plato on this […]

    Reply
  3. Podcasting « Wirkman Netizen says:
    January 22, 2013 at 6:21 pm

    […] were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it.” The current episode, on Plato’s Gorgias, brings back memories of this great dialogue — the one work of […]

    Reply
  4. Jeffrie G. Murphy (Cruel & Unusual Podcast) on Rationales for Punishment | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    January 28, 2013 at 2:11 pm

    […] Our Gorgias episode, included Plato’s claim that the purpose of punishment is reformative, i.e. to build character, either in the punished (reformation) or in observers (deterrence). That someone who does injustice should not then be rewarded for it is on Plato’s account the natural order of things, true by definition, as it were, and is in itself a reason (much like Kant’s thinking about this, as discussed here) for believing that there simply must be an afterlife where the virtuous are rewarded and the bad punished. […]

    Reply
  5. “Groundhog Day” as Platonic Morality Tale | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    February 15, 2013 at 2:52 am

    […] with my kids this past Feb. 2 for the first time in many years. I was struck in light of our recent episode on Plato’s Gorgias on the evolution of the character as he’s trapped in his ever-renewing […]

    Reply
  6. Topic for #73: Why Philosophy? | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    April 3, 2013 at 11:58 am

    […] in preparing this was to keep in mind our previous discussions of Plato’s Apology and Gorgias, so there’s a little bit of Plato talk in there, but for the most part is just our own […]

    Reply
  7. Topic for #69: Plato’s “Gorgias” on Rhetoric vs. Philosophy | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    July 10, 2013 at 10:05 am

    […] Listen to the episode. […]

    Reply
  8. Conversation vs. Crossfire (Philosophy, Arrogance, and the David Brin Episode) | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    March 28, 2014 at 9:37 am

    […] Philosophy is good for the soul. This has been our essential response (in episodes like the one on Plato’s Gorgias) to scientistic criticism: Philosophy is one of the humanities, and as such is one of the […]

    Reply
  9. Not Ep 69: “Gorgias” Full Cast Audioplay (Part 1) | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    June 30, 2015 at 2:34 pm

    […] podcasters and two listeners join to read Plato's fabulous dialogue, which is discussed in PEL Episode 69. Listening to this will be MIGHTY good preparation for listening to that […]

    Reply
  10. Not Episode 69: PEL Players Full Cast Audiobook of Plato’s “Gorgias” (part 1) | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    July 11, 2015 at 5:54 pm

    […] podcasters and two listeners join to read Plato's fabulous dialogue, which is discussed in PEL Episode 69. Listening to this will be MIGHTY good preparation for listening to that […]

    Reply
  11. Topic for #124: The Stoic Life with Epictetus | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    September 19, 2015 at 2:29 pm

    […] traditions (we've covered skepticism too, and still need to get to Epicureanism) that grew out of Plato, founded on the idea that life needs examining because things aren't as they seem and received […]

    Reply
  12. Topic for #125: Hannah Arendt on the Political, Private, and Social | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    September 28, 2015 at 7:45 am

    […] Action is all about human plurality, and throughout this work Arendt has as her model ancient Greek political life: As propertied Citizens, they saw being fully human, i.e., achieving eudaimonia (the good life for humans, what we teleologically aim for) as involving freedom from labor, which was taken care of within the house (largely by slaves, of course, and women hidden away engaged in the labor of birthing), and the public realm was all about free action among equals. It's hard to tell (even skimming the later whole chapter on "Action," which was not part of our assignment) exactly what Arendt had in mind by action, but if you think about the polis as being where paradigmatic action takes place, it's all about making speeches to convince your peers, i.e., rhetoric (exactly of the sort that Plato attacks as inferior to philosophy in the Gorgias). […]

    Reply
  13. Episode 142: Plato’s “Phaedrus” on Love and Speechmaking (Part One) | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    June 27, 2016 at 5:51 pm

    […] Episodes: Folks may want to listen to our past Plato episodes on The Symposium (on love), Gorgias (on rhetoric), and The Republic (on what's wrong with poetry and the structure of the […]

    Reply
  14. Deinotes: Dread, Wonder, and the Art of Persuasion | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    August 2, 2016 at 9:15 am

    […] why the Sophists were both disliked and revered, how the art of rhetoric works, and perhaps why Socrates himself was accused of mastering […]

    Reply
  15. Were the Sophists Really All That Bad? | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    August 28, 2016 at 10:44 pm

    […] gave Sophists a bad name, as they were the first professors of humanities and teachers of rhetoric—an art much needed in the budding democracy of ancient Greece. In his efforts to do away with […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

PEL Live Show 2023

Brothers K Live Show

Citizenship has its Benefits

Become a PEL Citizen
Become a PEL Citizen, and get access to all paywalled episodes, early and ad-free, including exclusive Part 2's for episodes starting September 2020; our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more causally; a community of fellow learners, and more.

Rate and Review

Nightcap

Listen to Nightcap
On Nightcap, listen to the guys respond to listener email and chat more casually about their lives, the making of the show, current events and politics, and anything else that happens to come up.

Subscribe to Email Updates

Select list(s):

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Support PEL

Buy stuff through Amazon and send a few shekels our way at no extra cost to you.

Tweets by PartiallyExLife

Recent Comments

  • Bibliophile on Pretty Much Pop #143: Pinocchio the Unfilmable (Yet Frequently Filmed)
  • Mark Linsenmayer on Ep. 302: Erasmus Praises Foolishness (Part Two)
  • Mark Linsenmayer on Ep. 308: Moore’s Proof of Mind-Independent Reality (Part Two for Supporters)
  • Mark Linsenmayer on Ep. 201: Marcus Aurelius’s Stoicism with Ryan Holiday (Citizen Edition)
  • MartinK on Ep. 201: Marcus Aurelius’s Stoicism with Ryan Holiday (Citizen Edition)

About The Partially Examined Life

The Partially Examined Life is a philosophy podcast by some guys who were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it. Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. You don’t have to know any philosophy, or even to have read the text we’re talking about to (mostly) follow and (hopefully) enjoy the discussion

Become a PEL Citizen!

As a PEL Citizen, you’ll have access to a private social community of philosophers, thinkers, and other partial examiners where you can join or initiate discussion groups dedicated to particular readings, participate in lively forums, arrange online meet-ups for impromptu seminars, and more. PEL Citizens also have free access to podcast transcripts, guided readings, episode guides, PEL music, and other citizen-exclusive material. Click here to join.

Blog Post Categories

  • (sub)Text
  • Aftershow
  • Announcements
  • Audiobook
  • Book Excerpts
  • Citizen Content
  • Citizen Document
  • Citizen News
  • Close Reading
  • Combat and Classics
  • Constellary Tales
  • Exclude from Newsletter
  • Featured Ad-Free
  • Featured Article
  • General Announcements
  • Interview
  • Letter to the Editor
  • Misc. Philosophical Musings
  • Nakedly Examined Music Podcast
  • Nakedly Self-Examined Music
  • NEM Bonus
  • Not School Recording
  • Not School Report
  • Other (i.e. Lesser) Podcasts
  • PEL Music
  • PEL Nightcap
  • PEL's Notes
  • Personal Philosophies
  • Phi Fic Podcast
  • Philosophy vs. Improv
  • Podcast Episode (Citizen)
  • Podcast Episodes
  • Pretty Much Pop
  • Reviewage
  • Song Self-Exam
  • Supporter Exclusive
  • Things to Watch
  • Vintage Episode (Citizen)
  • Web Detritus

Follow:

Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Apple Podcasts

Copyright © 2009 - 2023 · The Partially Examined Life, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Copyright Policy

Copyright © 2023 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in