Plato's Gorgias has long been considered a derogatory dialogue that denounces both rhetoric and its practitioners for their unethical use of eloquence. However, many scholars agree that Plato's explanation of rhetoric is both incomplete and misleading. George Kennedy, a Platonic scholar, asserts that Plato was incapable of perceiving the value of rhetoric; “rather embittered by the death of Socrates, he is so prejudiced that he in turn seems to weigh the scales against rhetoric” (quoted in Kastely 29). This claim implies that Plato may have allowed his antagonistic position on rhetoric to influence both the content and philosophical accuracy of the Gorgias. The philosophy of Socrates, Plato's beloved teacher, and the philosophy of Gorgias, an esteemed Leotinian sophist, come into conflict and are therefore emphasized in the dialogue. Unfortunately, Plato misrepresents both Gorgias the Sophist and Gorgianic rhetoric in his stigmatizing dialogue, the Gorgias. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayPlato's deliberate prevarication towards Gorgias and his technology is a consequence of his contempt for the sophists; furthermore, this prejudice manifests itself in the dialogue. Plato accused the Sophists of spreading deception, being evasive, and exploiting language for monetary gain in many of his dialogues. The biased author also disdained the notion that granted the sophists immunity from contradiction (Rankin 161). This is perhaps one of the reasons for the obvious false contradiction constructed in the exchange between Socrates and Gorgias. In this case, Gorgias attempts to justify the use of rhetoric but tragically admits to its societal abuses. Socrates immediately manipulates this honorable confession into a somewhat questionable contradiction, claiming that teachers of rhetoric are responsible for the actions of their students (Kastely 31). Plato's intention to pervert Gorgianic rhetoric is also evident in his decision to force Gorgias into the background of the dialogue, leaving two pathetically incompetent students to defend themselves (and their mentor's philosophy) against the wiser Socrates ( Kastely 33). Then, Socrates will of course hold Gorgias responsible for the errors of his students. Plato's first distortion of Gorgianic rhetoric occurs when he denies it technical status. He justifies this negation of eminence by judging the rhetoric irrational. Plato argues that only that which is based on an absolute truth discovered dialectically can be considered rational. Arguments that are not based on indisputable absolutes are mere beliefs and are therefore irrational (McComiskey 21). Gorgias unfortunately adheres to this statement in the following transaction: Socrates asks: “Now do you think that having learned and having believed, or knowledge and belief, are one and the same thing or different? Gorgias replies: “I consider them different, Socrates. » However, rational and irrational arguments can coexist. When asked about the effect of rhetoric on an audience, Gorgias further distorts the philosophy of Gorgias the Sophist by stating that his technique is only capable of generating belief (McComiskey 22). Therefore, by linking art to belief, Socrates condemned Gorgian rhetoric as irrational. In reality, Gorgias the Sophist would never have given credence to a case based on rationality, because Gorgias did not believe in the existence of rational or irrational arguments. Instead, he argued that allhuman beliefs were "kairotic" or situation-dependent and that it would be impossible to achieve the kairos of a given circumstance through absolute [pure] knowledge (Platonic concept). Therefore, a “relativistic epistemology,” such as that defended by Gorgias, is necessary to accurately interpret a rhetorical technique governed by kairos. According to Bruce McComiskey, "Gorgias' relativistic epistemology legitimizes his assertion that pure knowledge does not exist and that no logos [language] can be entirely rational" (23). Additionally, Gorgias also saw human perception as a variable to contend with. Human discernment is inherently biased and therefore produces an inaccurate version of knowledge. As the originator of this philosophical approach, Gorgias argued that no human thought could be considered “rational” (24). Plato further misrepresents Gorgian rhetoric by asserting that rhetoric functions solely as flattery and therefore is not concerned with the "greater good." " Plato has Gorgias legitimize this falsification by affirming that the rhetorician has the capacity to persuade a "crowd" with more success than an expert (McComiskey 25). Socrates retorts that a rhetorician can only persuade the ignorant (crowd) due to their lack of knowledge Gorgias consents, claiming that in many cases the rhetorician does not possess absolute knowledge on the subject he is speaking about. By forcing Gorgias to accept that the rational and the irrational exist, Plato also coerces. the sophist to accept that instruction results in knowledge rational belief) and persuasion results in conviction (irrational belief) Socrates concludes: “Then rhetoric is apparently creating conviction which is persuasive but not instructive about the good and. evil” (McComiskey 26). Despite Socrates’ attempt to condemn Gorgias and his rhetoric as irrational and corrupt, Gorgianic rhetoric advocates the greater good. McComiskey proclaims: "I argue that Gorgianic rhetoric is concerned with the greater good, contrary to what Plato would have us believe - but it is the good of the community." Gorgias helps the community achieve its goals by employing a affective and aesthetic discourse The emotional appeals scattered throughout Gorgianic rhetoric aim to elicit particular emotional responses from the community, which in turn incite it to action (28). of rhetoric is to serve the community by persuading it to undertake beneficial actions when, through ignorance or fear, it is unwilling to do so” Thus, Gorgianic rhetoric exposes Gorgias' dedication to society and. helps the public decide on a self-interested strategy (35 In addition to rejecting the idea of ​​pure knowledge to defend his relativist and communitarian epistemology, Gorgias the Sophist argued that absolute knowledge (a prerequisite for knowledge). instruction) was inaccessible due to inherent flaws in logos or language (McComiskey 26). Language is the product of an imperfect creator. Therefore, it is logically deduced that language is inherently imperfect and ultimately inadequate. The messages conveyed by logos are therefore distorted versions of perceived realities. HD Rankin comments: “In formulating and pronouncing a logos, we are not expressing the existing or the reality that the logos intends to communicate. All we express are logos. Any meaning the logos may have for us has seeped into us through our perception. ...It is these perceptions which illuminate the logos rather than the logos illuminating reality or, 1983.