When I was reading Socrates’
conversation with Agathon, I was pretty unconvinced by Socrates’ logic.
However, it is apparent that Agathon was, and so my question became why
Socrates so completely convinced Agathon. The reason lies in how Socrates asks
questions of Agathon. Socrates’ argument is convincing to Agathon because
Socrates asks Agathon very specific leading questions.
Socrates’ argument style rests
heavily on the listener repeatedly agreeing with him, thus digging the listener
into a hole where he or she can no longer disagree with Socrates. He starts out
by giving a statement and then asking Agathon whether or not he agrees. For example,
“‘What about this: a brother, just insofar as he is a brother, is he the brother of something or not?’” (199E). This
type of question has only two answers, one of which is completely
ridiculous—the definition of a leading question. This style forces Agathon to
answer in the way which Socrates wants him to answer.
From there, it is all downhill.
Socrates is able to force Agathon to agree with him on several statements and
then uses the transitive property of equality to equate the first statement
with the last. Within the text, this is how Socrates is able to convince
Agathon that Love is not beautiful. Agathon already has agreed that it is a
brother of something, and therefore must agree that love is the love of
something. Socrates then asks him “does [a man] actually have what he desires
and loves at that time, or doesn’t he?” (200A). With the wording of the
questioning, Agathon says that he does not have what he desires and loves at
the same time. Then, Socrates equates the two statements by saying that “Love
needs beauty, then, and does not have it” because Love has a desire for beauty
and one can’t have a desire for something at the same that that it has that
something.
If Socrates had merely asked Agathon
if Love was beautiful, he would have answered in the affirmative, as he
asserted in his speech. However, once Agathon began to agree with Socrates, he
was forced to continue agreeing. Socrates is able to take statements that Agathon
agrees to and bend them in a way so that they are still true, but are in a
different context then when Agathon agreed to them. Agathon is not able to
argue, because he has already agreed that the statement is true. Therefore, by
using carefully constructed and leading questions, Socrates is able to convince
Agathon that the opposite of what Agathon asserted in his speech is true.
Emma makes a great point about the style of Socrates' arguments. I, too found while reading that Socrates repeatedly backs his audience into an answer plainly by asking them a question they can't refute. By answering in the affirmative, Agathon effectively refutes his previous argument that love is beautiful, even stating, "it turns out, Socrates, I didn't know what I was talking about in that speech" (201C). This short dialogue between Agathon and Socrates really showed me why Socrates was so good at his job, and like Emma said, how he was so incredibly convincing.
ReplyDeleteI was trying to figure out why Socrates words his questions so carefully that the only rational response is to answer the way he wants. Obviously, it is an effective means to prove his argument, as Emma so clearly lays out. By constructing his questions in such a specific manner Agathon does not need to think because a specific reply would be common sense. This is evidenced by the short answers either in the affirmative or negative depending on what Socrates wants to hear. In this way he coerces people to agree with him leaving them thinking that they "didn't know what [they] were talking about in that speech," that they made (43).
ReplyDeleteLike Emma, I find Socrates' argument style good at convincing those with him. By asking questions that are worded to only really have one answer, Socrates can completely change people's minds, such as he does with Agathon. I find it interesting how he uses the point that (quoting Emma) "one can’t have a desire for something at the same that that it has that something," but later he goes to prove this statement untrue. He says that one can in fact desire what one has if he or she desires to have this thing in the future. I just find this ironic that Socrates gets Agathon to agree that people cannot desire something they have as part of his argument, but then continues, and convinces Agathon that one actually can desire something one has.
ReplyDelete