Symposium - AIC

ABSTRACT
Agathon’s Gorgianic Logic
Richard Patterson
In responding to Agathon’s speech, Socrates notes the influence of Gorgias. Commentators have
pointed to Agathon’s free use of the verbal “anthitheses” for which Gorgias was famous, especially in
the concluding section of his speech, which Socrates professes to find particularly impressive. Indeed
Agathon surpasses Gorgias in this respect, although at the cost of any semblance of seriousness of
purpose.
Equally characteristic of Gorgias’ style, however, is the self-conscious highlighting of a
speech’s logical structure. This consists partly in displaying an ability to produce arguments for any
thesis, however outrageous. That much seems to be part of what any clever sophist is supposed to be
able to do. But Gorgias likes to make explicit every significant point relevant to a thesis, then argue
for each point systematically and exhaustively—as opposed to persuading the hearer, at least on some
points, by other means (e.g., projecting an air of authority, manipulating emotion). This careful and
conspicuous logical structuring typifies Georgias’ best known and most clearly authentic works—the
Defense of Helen and On What Is Not. Gorgias stands out among the sophists in this respect (which is
not to say that the rest do not use deductive argument). His performance in On What Is Not is
surpassed only by Plato in the Parmenides--and perhaps Zeno, in a work attested by Proclus and
alluded to in the Parmenides.
Agathon takes things to the extreme, arguing for every statement that pops out of his mouth,
whether trivial or seemingly important, and whether the argument provided is any good or not. In fact
Agathon’s argumentation (encompassing about two dozen short, densely ordered deductions
“proving” the attributes of Eros) amounts itself to a kind of verbal pyrotechnics, one in deductive
mode.
All three marks of Gorgianic rhetoric (virtuosic use of verbal antitheses, formulation of an
argument for every relevant point, and making evident, for all to admire, the systematic and
exhaustive nature of the overall logic of a speech) characterize Agathon’s contribution to the
Symposium.
What is Plato’s point in composing such a speech for Agathon? Aside from showing that
Plato can (as usual) beat his rivals at their own game, even while exposing the shallowness of their
efforts, it serves important dramatic purposes (as described in “The Platonic conception of Tragedy
and Comedy”, Philosophy and Literature, 1982). It also contains thoughts about the creative--and
inspirational-- force of eros that are developed more deeply in Diotima’s speech. But comparison of
the two speeches—and the intermediate section showing that Agathon did not know what he was
talking about—reveals that eros must be educated through philosophical logos if it is to bring us into
contact with, and then give birth to, what is genuinely beautiful (by a process described in “The
Ascent in Plato’s Symposium”, Proceedings, Boston Area Colloquium, 1991). Pace the Beatles, it is
false that “Love Is All You Need”.