Assignment 2: Gorgias (Nafisah)

If I had my way, I would have titled this book Socrates: the ultimate manipulator. As you can see I do not exactly have a very good impression of Socrates. The part that ticked me off began from the second part of the book where the conversation lied between Polus and Socrates. In this section, I began to see how Socrates tries to twist the definition of the keywords in their discussion so as to make his partner agree or trapped by his logical reasonings. As good as Socrate’s intention to discuss the topic rationally, without having any intentions to win the discussion or having his emotions interfere with their debate, he has already stirred impatience within the group by his usage of certain strong words such as “dishonourable” to describe the art of oratory. This to me is considered demeaning to the art itself and the comment on how Polus is impatient with his “young blood” and how forgetful he was as he could not remember exactly what Socrates has said though he was young, is seen as a personal attack on his age. Socrates also tends to repeatedly ask Polus if he thinks he is as good an orator as Gorgias which could have discretely hinted to Polus that he was probably not mature and intellectual enough to engage in a discussion with him.

“We do not want acts that are means, but the ends to which they are means”. This particular second section hit me as it was dealing with whether the end is more important than the means. Polus agrees too readily with Socrates’ clear cut separation of means and ends in this section. In simpler terms, the issue here is whether the outcome of an action is more important than the action or process itself. It actually depends on what one takes as a process and prioritizes. Socrates concluded that men generally do something because they want to gain something, assumingly good, at the end. This can be considered a success in something or a reward in which case I do not think is necessary for all cases. The process does count because that is the period where an individual develops his or herself. Also, I personally do not belief that one should attain something by any means, such as going to the extent of hurting someone or doing something immoral.

What I can apply to my term in the CDC is that as an intern, I might be considered as Polus, inexperienced and immature. How Polus reacts impatiently to Socrates' questions eventually gets him tangled up in his own argument. As someone new, it would probably be best to observe and learn from the more experience and not too intent on rushing into things. Also, during my term here, I would be given projects and I should be focussing on trying to aquire the skills needed in social service work rather than to focus only on the outcome, such as how an event turns out. Furthermore, a great issue in this book is whether the art of oratory is powerful. Although one does need the knowledge to deliver the goods, the art of oratory gives life to what we have to say and inevitably, people like to hear what they like to hear. Thus it is important to have good communication skills so that my ideas could be put across to my supervisors more accurately and clearly during my say here.

In life, things do not always turn out the way they are, but if one has done their best, then there is no need for them to regret because then it is all up to fate and our individual capabilities. I used to think that if I have decided on something and it eventually turned bad, the decision was bad on the whole. But maybe I was not aware that in the process of doing the actions, I have actually learnt something. For example during exams, (thats the common scenario for most of us) I tend to think of how I could get my A, but the actual fact is that I need to consider what will get me that A, like how I study or my own attitude.


There is one more thing though that makes me wonder. How come Socrates look down on Gorgias' profession while he himself is obviously displaying how a firm grasp in the skill of oratory could convince people into believing that his arguments are right, or at least acceptable.