Aristotle's Rhetoric: Plato's Legacy Continued?

In reading Aristotle's Rhetoric, it is important to note that many ideas about oratory encountered in Plato's Gorgias and Phaedrus reemerge. Aristotle, as Plato's student, has taken what he learned about oratory and expended upon it based on his experiences and studies. The main concern of both Aristotle and Plato regards the definition of rhetoric. In examining the practice of oratory, both men seek an understanding of what rhetoric is, whether it can be thought or learned, and what qualities are needed to practice oratory. Furthermore, both men explore the definition of what is "good", from which the position of "pleasure" must be defined in accordance to the implications it provides for persons who practice oratory, as well as the implications it provides when used as an end to a mean. Aristotle's idea about the definition of rhetoric is the same as that of Plato - both men agree that rhetoric is not an art (science) but rather a knack. However, Aristotle's argument about "pleasure" is different that that of Plato, as Aristotle regards pleasure as "good", and places fundamentally less importance on it then Plato.

It is of great significance to note that Aristotle believes rhetoric to be a knack, as Plato did. We can suppose that this similarity steams from the fact that Aristotle studied with Plato, and simply expended on Plato's ideas of rhetoric. Although Aristotle does not use the term "knack", his elaborative definition clearly states that rhetoric "belongs to no definite science" (Rhetoric, p. 19). His use of the term "art" on several occasions refers to the systematic handling of a subject, and is not referring to "techne", or a science (whereas Plato uses "art" to refer to science). In addition, Aristotle demonstrates that rhetoric is concerned with "observing in any given case the availability of means of persuasion". As such, rhetoric is concerned with speech that is not tied to a particular subject; rather, a good orator should be able to find ways to persuade an audience on any given subject using "rhetorical syllogisms ... that apply to equally to questions of right conduct, natural sciences, politics, and many other things" (Rhetoric, p. 19-31). This is in alignment of Plato's argument about rhetoric and oratory. Through the dialog of Socrates and Gorgias, Plato indicates that oratory is "a knack gained by experience", and he further classifies it as subdivision of pandering (Gorgias, p. 43-44). Moreover, years after he makes such claim in Gorgias, Plato confirms his belief about rhetoric in Phaedrus. He positions Socrates in discussion with young Phaedrus about oratory, and states yet again "she is not an art but a knack which has nothing to do with art" (Phaedrus, p. 63). Thus, it is clear that Aristotle hold true the definition of rhetoric as argued by Plato, as both agree that oratory is not a science, but an ability merely posing as science.

Aristotle's idea of "pleasure" conflicts with that of Plato's, as Aristotle believes "pleasure" is in fact equal to "good". In Rhetoric, Aristotle asserts that "pleasure must be a good thing, since it is the nature of all animals to aim at it" (Rhetoric, p. 43). He claims that in order for a speaker to appeal to an audience, he must first understand what is good, and use it to provoke interest-bearing affect on said audience. If things produce pleasure to us in some way, they must be good, reasons Aristotle (Rhetoric, p. 41-43); such good things can be used when addressing an audience for the virtue that they will provide pleasure. However, Aristotle only briefly touches on this issue, and does not return to it in speaking of its implications to actions one would take resulting from one's drive to obtain pleasant things. From this, it appears that Aristotle places significantly less importance to "pleasure" then Plato, who devoted a somewhat large part of the Gorgias text to defining the implications of pleasure in oratory. Plato ties the existence of "pleasure" into the definition of oratory by saying that rhetoric is dishonorable since "it makes pleasure its aim instead of good" (Gorgias, p. 46). "Pleasure" is defined here as a result of an action used as a mean to an end that one knows would produce pleasant things, whether such action is classified as "good" or "evil". Plato believes that this is an important issue to consider, as things and feelings that are pleasant don't always result from righteous action (Gorgias, p. 46-55). Although, Plato agrees that pleasant things can be conceived as good, he argues "that good is not identical with pleasure" (Gorgias, p. 100).

In looking at texts written by both Plato and Aristotle, it is apparent that their studies have overlapping ideas, such as the meaning of rhetoric. Many of ideas about rhetoric and oratory were initially introduced by Plato and later elaborated on by Aristotle. However, it is also important to note that each man places different emphasis on said ideas, such as the importance of pleasure, although there are no ideas introduced by Plato that were completely disregarded by Aristotle. Overall, their studies of rhetoric provide us with an elaborate way to explore the subject of oratory and its use, both past and present, and understand how language and manner of speech has both stayed the same and developed over time.