按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
rhetoric： have you anything to add？
Phaedr。 Not much； nothing very important。
Soc。 Leave the unimportant and let us bring the really important
question into the light of day； which is： What power has this art of
rhetoric； and when？
Phaedr。 A very great power in public meetings。
Soc。 It has。 But I should like to know whether you have the same
feeling as I have about the rhetoricians？ To me there seem to be a
great many holes in their web。
Phaedr。 Give an example。
Soc。 I will。 Suppose a person to come to your friend Eryximachus； or
to his father Acumenus； and to say to him： 〃I know how to apply
drugs which shall have either a heating or a cooling effect； and I can
give a vomit and also a purge； and all that sort of thing； and knowing
all this； as I do； I claim to be a physician and to make physicians by
imparting this knowledge to others；〃…what do you suppose that they
would say？
Phaedr。 They would be sure to ask him whether he knew 〃to whom〃 he
would give his medicines； and 〃when；〃 and 〃how much。〃
Soc。 And suppose that he were to reply： 〃No； I know nothing of all
that； I expect the patient who consults me to be able to do these
things for himself〃？
Phaedr。 They would say in reply that he is a madman or pedant who
fancies that he is a physician because he has read something in a
book； or has stumbled on a prescription or two； although he has no
real understanding of the art of medicine。
Soc。 And suppose a person were to come to Sophocles or Euripides and
say that he knows how to make a very long speech about a small matter；
and a short speech about a great matter； and also a sorrowful
speech； or a terrible； or threatening speech； or any other kind of
speech； and in teaching this fancies that he is teaching the art of
tragedy…？
Phaedr。 They too would surely laugh at him if he fancies that
tragedy is anything but the arranging of these elements in a manner
which will be suitable to one another and to the whole。
Soc。 But I do not suppose that they would be rude or abusive to him：
Would they not treat him as a musician would a man who thinks that
he is a harmonist because he knows how to pitch the highest and lowest
notes； happening to meet such an one he would not say to him savagely；
〃Fool； you are mad！〃 But like a musician； in a gentle and harmonious
tone of voice； he would answer： 〃My good friend； he who would be a
harmonist must certainly know this； and yet he may understand
nothing of harmony if he has not got beyond your stage of knowledge；
for you only know the preliminaries of harmony and not harmony
itself。〃
Phaedr。 Very true。
Soc。 And will not Sophocles say to the display of the would…be
tragedian； that this is not tragedy but the preliminaries of
tragedy？ and will not Acumenus say the same of medicine to the
would…be physician？
Phaedr。 Quite true。
Soc。 And if Adrastus the mellifluous or Pericles heard of these
wonderful arts； brachylogies and eikonologies and all the hard names
which we have been endeavouring to draw into the light of day； what
would they say？ Instead of losing temper and applying
uncomplimentary epithets； as you and I have been doing； to the authors
of such an imaginary art； their superior wisdom would rather censure
us； as well as them。 〃Have a little patience； Phaedrus and Socrates；
they would say； you should not be in such a passion with those who
from some want of dialectical skill are unable to define the nature of
rhetoric； and consequently suppose that they have found the art in the
preliminary conditions of it； and when these have been taught by
them to others； fancy that the whole art of rhetoric has been taught
by them； but as to using the several instruments of the art
effectively； or making the composition a whole；…an application of it
such as this is they regard as an easy thing which their disciples may
make for themselves。〃
Phaedr。 I quite admit； Socrates； that the art of rhetoric which
these men teach and of which they write is such as you
describe…there I agree with you。 But I still want to know where and
how the true art of rhetoric and persuasion is to be acquired。
Soc。 The perfection which is required of the finished orator is；
or rather must be； like the perfection of anything else； partly
given by nature； but may also be assisted by art。 If you have the
natural power and add to it knowledge and practice； you will be a
distinguished speaker； if you fall short in either of these； you
will be to that extent defective。 But the art； as far as there is an
art； of rhetoric does not lie in the direction of Lysias or
Thrasymachus。
Phaedr。 In what direction then？
Soc。 I conceive Pericles to have been the most accomplished of
rhetoricians。
Phaedr。 What of that？
Soc。 All the great arts require discussion and high speculation
about the truths of nature； hence come loftiness of thought and
completeness of execution。 And this； as I conceive； was the quality
which； in addition to his natural gifts； Pericles acquired from his
intercourse with Anaxagoras whom he happened to know。 He was thus
imbued with the higher philosophy； and attained the knowledge of
Mind and the negative of Mind； which were favourite themes of
Anaxagoras； and applied what suited his purpose to the art of
speaking。
Phaedr。 Explain。
Soc。 Rhetoric is like medicine。
Phaedr。 How so？
Soc。 Why； because medicine has to define the nature of the body
and rhetoric of the soul…if we would proceed； not empirically but
scientifically； in the one case to impart health and strength by
giving medicine and food in the other to implant the conviction or
virtue which you desire； by the right application of words and
training。
Phaedr。 There； Socrates； I suspect that you are right。
Soc。 And do you think that you can know the nature of the soul
intelligently without knowing the nature of the whole？
Phaedr。 Hippocrates the Asclepiad says that the nature even of the
body can only be understood as a whole。
Soc。 Yes； friend； and he was right：…still； we ought not to be
content with the name of Hippocrates； but to examine and see whether
his argument agrees with his conception of nature。
Phaedr。 I agree。
Soc。 Then consider what truth as well as Hippocrates says about this
or about any other nature。 Ought we not to consider first whether that
which we wish to learn and to teach is a simple or multiform thing；
and if simple； then to enquire what power it has of acting or being
acted upon in relation to other t