Socrates, Callicles, and other characters are discussing Gorgias' speech outside a public building. Socrates missed the lecture but wants to speak to Gorgias in person. His friends arrange a meeting between the two.Socrates is particularly interested in understanding what Gorgias' skill entails. Gorgias claims to be an orator and explains that oratory involves giving speeches to persuade people in public. When Socrates asks for more details, Gorgias elaborates that oratory deals with discussions about what is right and wrong.

Introduction

Socrates attempts to distinguish between knowledge and mere argument. Gorgias agrees that orators do not necessarily teach about what is right or wrong but rather focus on how to persuade others. In other words, public speakers don't need extensive knowledge on a subject—they only need to appear knowledgeable.Gorgias also defends orators by saying they shouldn't be blamed if their students misuse their skills, just as a boxing teacher wouldn't be blamed if a student misuses their training.

The Nature Of Oratory

In the conclusion, Socrates acknowledges that he might not fare well in court, as people often prefer comforting lies to hard truths. However, he remains unafraid of any misfortune, focusing instead on the state of his soul when facing judgment in the afterlife. Socrates urges Callicles to join him in pursuing the best life possible, warning him with a story from Homer’s Odyssey about the judgment of souls.

This is, in fact, how Justice is determined: the stronger shall rule and have the advantage over his inferior.

Socrates then explores whether having knowledge about a subject makes a person embody that knowledge—such as whether someone who knows what is right and wrong would be a righteous person. Socrates finds it illogical when Gorgias agrees. If oratory were about doing what is right, an orator wouldn't misuse their skills, contradicting Gorgias' earlier statement.

The Ethical Implications of Oratory

Callicles, another interlocutor, accuses Socrates of pandering to the crowd and rejects his moral views. He argues that justice is a tool for the weak to control the strong, and that superior individuals should naturally dominate society. Socrates, however, insists that even the superior must control their desires to rule justly. Callicles dismisses this idea, advocating for a life of indulgence and freedom from restraint. Socrates attempts to show that a regulated life is better, distinguishing between what is pleasant and what is genuinely good.

Callicles Challenges Socrates

Socrates concludes by asserting that doing wrong is worse than suffering wrong, being truly good is more important than merely appearing good, and oratory should only support what is just. He advises that if one seeks happiness in this life and the afterlife, they should follow the path of philosophy rather than waste time on politics and public speaking.

Socrates argues that not all pleasures are beneficial, and not all pains are harmful. Discerning this difference is crucial to living well, and this leads to a debate over whether a life focused on politics or philosophy is better. While both Socrates and Callicles agree that oratory can serve the body and soul, Socrates argues that most public speakers prioritize personal gain over the public good. He emphasizes that the soul should be well-ordered, and that a good orator would prioritize the soul's well-being, just as a doctor considers long-term health.

Polus, a young orator, interrupts to challenge Socrates, accusing him of rudeness. He questions Socrates’ view on oratory, to which Socrates responds that he sees it as mere flattery rather than an art. Socrates likens oratory to baking, suggesting that just as bakers provide immediate gratification through sweets, orators flatter their listeners without aiming for long-term good. True skills, Socrates argues, should promote lasting benefits—health for the body and justice for the soul—whereas oratory only seeks to please in the short term.

Polus Enters the Debate

Polus defends orators by highlighting their societal power, comparable to rulers who can imprison or kill. Socrates counters by asserting that true rulers do not always achieve their desires, as true desires should be directed toward the good. Even if a ruler or orator believes their unjust actions are good, they are not genuinely fulfilling their desires. Polus reluctantly agrees that wrongdoers should be punished, though he notes that many evade punishment and remain happy. Socrates refutes this, arguing that true happiness comes from facing justice, which cleanses the soul of wrongdoing.

The struggle which Plato has Socrates recommend to his interlocutors in Gorgias - and to his readers - is the struggle to overcome the temptations of worldly success and to concentrate on genuine morality. Ostensibly an enquiry into the value of rhetoric, the dialogue soon becomes an investigation into the value of these two contrasting ways of life. In a series of dazzling and bold arguments, Plato attempts to establish that only morality can bring a person true happiness, and to demolish alternative viewpoints. It is not suprising that Gorgias is one of Plato's most widely read dialogues. Philosophers read it for its coverage of central moral issues; others enjoy its vividness, clarity and occasional bitter humour. This new translation is accompanied by explanatory notes and an informative introduction.

CALLICLES

Similar ideas

Why Winners (Almost) Take All

These are the 3 most impactful lessons I’ve learned:

The Flaw in Jordan Peterson’s Argument On Hierarchy