Ethos Socrates Talks Himself Out of His Body
Ethos Socrates Talks Himself Out of His Body
复制标题
苏格拉底精神从他的身体中谈论自己
DOI：
10.1002/9780470999851.ch13
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Eugene Garver
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Eugene Garver
柏拉图的《斐多篇》似乎是最反修辞的作家的最反修辞的作品。苏格拉底在这里和其他地方一样，坚持认为在话语和生活中，只有理性才是重要的。我们应该力求真理，而不是说服。斐多篇的主题强化了这种反修辞的立场。如果说有什么东西只能由理性决定的话，那就是灵魂的不朽。如果有一个问题，观众的意见是无关紧要的，并且可能被一厢情愿、自欺欺人和其他激情所腐蚀，那就是灵魂的不朽。斐多篇包含了一系列的四个抽象的，灵魂不朽的理论证明，自成一体，并从讨论的其余部分出发，涉及苏格拉底和他的对话者的特殊情感，希望和恐惧，并最终在一个神话中达到高潮，最后，苏格拉底的死亡。这些证明似乎实现了苏格拉底的反修辞的野心，使关于不朽的论述尽可能地纯逻辑化。甚至对话末尾的神话也是自成一体的;它没有建立在任何证据之上，似乎没有理由在讨论的任何时候都不能提出来。证明的自足性反映了灵魂的自足性，苏格拉底将论证灵魂是不朽的。《斐多篇》比柏拉图的其他对话录更反修辞，即使是那些他攻击和谴责修辞的对话录。只有在这里，苏格拉底才对说服别人不感兴趣。我不会急于使我所说的话对我的听众似乎是真实的，除非是次要的，但我会非常渴望使自己相信它”（91 a8 -9）。《斐多篇》的反修辞性质来自于苏格拉底在他最后的几个小时里，对说服别人缺乏兴趣。
Plato’s Phaedo might seem the most anti-rhetorical work of a most anti-rhetorical writer. Socrates insists, here as elsewhere, that only reason should count, in discourse and in life. We should aim at truth, not persuasion. That anti-rhetorical stance is reinforced by the subject of the Phaedo. If anything should be decided by reason alone, it’s the immortality of the soul. If there ever was a question where the opinions of the audience were irrelevant and likely to be corrupted by wishful thinking, selfdeception, and other passions, it’s the immortality of the soul. The Phaedo contains a series of four abstract, theoretical proofs of the immortality of the soul, self-contained and set off from the rest of the discussion, which involve the particular emotions, hopes, and fears of Socrates and his interlocutors, and culminating in a myth and, finally, Socrates’ death. The proofs seem to fulfill Socrates’ antirhetorical ambitions by making discourse about immortality as purely logical as possible. Even the myth at the end of the dialogue is self-contained; it doesn’t build on any of the proofs and there seems to be no reason why it could not have been offered at any point in the discussion. The self-contained nature of the proofs mirrors the self-contained nature of the soul that Socrates will argue is immortal. The Phaedo is more anti-rhetorical than Plato’s other dialogues, even those where he attacks and condemns rhetoric. Here alone Socrates is not interested in persuading others.‘‘I shall not be eager to make what I say seem true to my hearers, except as a secondary matter, but shall be very eager to make myself believe it’’(91a8–9). The anti-rhetorical nature of the Phaedo comes from Socrates’ lack of interest, in his final hours, in persuading anyone else.