While reading Gorgias of Leontini's "Encomium of Helen", I was struck by the elegant, yet simple logic that he uses in regards to blame and causation. It can so easily be applied to writing and to rhetoric (as I am sure it was intended). This may come across incredibly muddled, but I will do my best to explain my question:
If we apply Gorgias' argument to language and writing, in so far as blame or intention is difficult to assign, then can it be said that both reader and writer are "blameless"? I simple mean that it is language, and the limits of it, that dictate what is understood and what is created. Would rhetoric then be the way of addressing the limitations of language?
After writing this blog post, I am certainly feeling the limitations of language (haha).
I don't know if i would say blameless so much as unaccountable. :)
ReplyDeleteI am by no means able to answer the question; but it seems to me that rhetoric would be more of an example of exploring (or demonstrating) the power of language as opposed to the limitations!
ReplyDeleteI guess the reader is blameless if you accept the argument that being persuaded (brainwashed...?) removes blame. Although, I don't think that takes away free will to choose whether or not to succumb to the person doing the persuading.
ReplyDelete