Phaedrus and Letters VII and VIII

by Plato, Walter Hamilton

In the Phaedrus Plato(427-347 B.C.) is concerned with establishing the principles of rhetoric.

Through the mouths of Socrates and Phaedrus he argues that rhetoric is only acceptable as an art when it is firmly based on the truth inspired by love, the common experience of true philosophic activity. It is in this dialogue that Plato employs the famous image of love as the driver of the chariot of souls.

The seventh and eight letters (which are accepted as genuine amongst those attributed to Plato) provide fascinating glimpses into the contemporary power struggle in Sicily and evidence his failure to put into practice his theory of philosopher-king.

Genres: Philosophy, Classics, Nonfiction, Literature, Classical Studies, Ancient, Theory

160 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1973

About the author

Plato (Greek: Πλάτων), born Aristocles (c. 427 – 348 BC), was an ancient Greek philosopher of the Classical period who is considered a foundational thinker in Western philosophy and an innovator of the written dialogue and dialectic forms. He raised problems for what became all the major areas of both theoretical philosophy and practical philosophy, and was the founder of the Platonic Academy, a philosophical school in Athens where Plato taught the doctrines that would later become known as Platonism.
Plato's most famous contribution is the theory of forms (or ideas), which has been interpreted as advancing a solution to what is now known as the problem of universals. He was decisively influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself.
Along with his teacher Socrates, and Aristotle, his student, Plato is a central figure in the history of philosophy. Plato's entire body of work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years—unlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries. Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages. Through Neoplatonism, he also greatly influenced both Christian and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead famously said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."

Reviews

[Nathanial · Rating 3 out of 5]

That Socrates was one saucy queen.

"Why Phaedrus, is that a scroll in your toga, or are you just happy to see me? My dear friend, nothing would please me more than to hear you recite that speech. Sure, let's take a walk to the countryside and discuss love. Don't you find that walking barefoot in the stream is more refreshing?[...] Oh, now, that was one delightful speech. Simply divine. No, no, I couldn't possibly compare...well, if you insist, I guess I'll try (this glade is just full of spirits - perhaps if I hide my face from you, one of them will infuse my words)."

And then he really gets started.

The dialogues present a model of literary criticism that depends on imitation and refutation--i.e., "oh yeah? Well, how 'bout this?" followed by a speech that blows the first one out of the water.

But the best part is the stuff in between the speeches. Coy taunts and ironically humble, Socrates is such a winner of a character. Plato knew what he was doing when he made it into a series. (Socrates, First Word Part Two...with Sly in sandals!)

The letters are Plato's response to an appeal for political advice. My favorite part comes in the editor's preface, where he describes the fate of Dionysus, tyrant of Syracuse, who ended up in exile as a schoolteacher!

[Feliks · Rating 2 out of 5]

Didn't get much out of this one. Can't seem to find a work yet by Plato that I truly adore. Aristotle for me!

[Jack Crouse · Rating 3 out of 5]

(i only read phaedrus)

[Jake · Rating 4 out of 5]

As always, incredibly stimulating, insightful, and...a far cry from the Truth that Plato could not see with the natural mind.

[Matthew Gallaway · Rating 5 out of 5]

Here Plato gets pretty heavily into the philosophy and art of love and rhetoric, in the context of a discussion or "dialogue" between Socrates and Phaedrus about whether a boy is better served by an older man who loves him or doesn't love him and just admits his desire. I'm not going to spend a ton of time raving about Plato because his writing is obviously a foundation of western thought, and this text does nothing to disprove the notion. The letters concern several episodes of Plato's political tribulations and touch upon his notions of representative democracy. Mostly I was struck by the certainty that we as people are not fundamentally very different than we were ~ 2400 years ago when this was written. It was also fun to see what I had underlined 25 years ago when I first read the book as part of a freshman lit class.

[Curtis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Phaedrus is a dialogue generally believed to come in the later part of Plato's middle period, possibly being the last dialogue of this period. There are chiefly two things being discussed: Love and rhetoric.

There are a few things about this dialogue that struck me as unusual. Firstly, the dialogue takes place outside of the city of Athens surrounded by nature (Plato's dialogues almost invariably take place within the city). This sets us up for the next unusual feature of the dialogue, which is that Socrates makes two relatively long speeches in quick succession, each of them promoting opposing ideas, the first of these speeches being uncharacteristically rhetorical, and the second uncharacteristically poetic.

The third and (for me) most notable feature of the dialogue is that it seems to have a higher concentration of Plato's core ideas than any Platonic dialogue I've read so far. It includes a myth similar to The Myth of Er from Republic, the Doctrine of Recollection from Meno, the idea of rhetoric as flattery (Gorgias) and the Ladder of Love (Symposium), all wrapped up in a short 70-80 page dialogue. Having read the above-mentioned dialogues, I found the Phaedrus quite straightforward in its ideas, but would strongly recommend reading all four of them before reading the Phaedrus if you are not familiar with these concepts, or at the very least Meno and Symposium, or you may find yourself very confused by Plato's sometimes offhand references to these quite complicated ideas.

The newest idea discussed in Phaedrus seems to be Plato's new method of 'dialectic', which he describes as being of the 'collection' and 'division' of particular ideas relating to the topic under discussion. Apart from this, the Phaedrus felt something like a recapitulation of of Plato's main ideas up to this point. This isn't a bad thing though, and it's very satisfying to feel the various Platonic concepts that you've worked to understand in the preceding dialogues come together as one complete picture.

My own experience of reading the Phaedrus was a good one, even though I did find it a little heavy on the myths (I know some people love this side of Plato but I find it a little tedious in all honesty). What I noticed most of all was that I read the entire dialogue in one sitting, even though that meant staying up a lot later than I'd planned in order to finish it. At that point, I felt quite energised by this dialogue and decided to give it a 5 star review. Upon the customary second reading that is necessary for Plato's work, however, I found it difficult to get excited about and gave up after about 20 pages. I think this may be because most of the ideas that are discussed are ideas I was already familiar with before Phaedrus, so after the novelty of seeing them all tied together in the first reading had worn off, there was little left to keep me confused enough to maintain my interest. Anyway, that's why it gets 4 stars from me. All in all, a really worthwhile dialogue if you still have energy after Meno, Republic and Symposium.

The Seventh Letter is quite interesting too, particularly Plato's anger at the idea of someone writing his (Plato's) ideas down in book form, which helps us to further understand the arguments that close the Phaedrus and the way in which he sees his own dialogues as being completely disconnected from more direct philosophical treatises.

[Zoir · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Phaedrus helped me understand Plato better after diving into his other great dialogues. I observed Plato further developing his stance on love, distinguishing it from the love we commonly understand, such as romantic, erotic, familial, etc.

One dumb impression I had, much like in Symposium, is that his descriptions of love come across as though he is intent on redefining love to his standards, almost as if he did not fit in with the classical notions of love in his time. It has that "I'm quirky" or, "I'm not like the other girls" energy. But these are the kind of remarks my mind spawns at me as I wash dishes. 

More seriously, I've been fond of Plato's exposition on absolute love from the Symposium ever since I first encountered it in a first-year philosophy course. The way he develops this notion within his metaphysical framework is intriguing. If I were to create a theory to describe reality, love wouldn't be my first choice--yet that boy Platon makes it foundational, and somehow it is compelling. When I encounter metaphysical frameworks, they often struggle with ethical grounding, but Plato’s perspective nails that part from the outset. 

Overall, reading both the Phaedrus and the letters, I've come away with a view of Plato as a more compassionate and ethical figure than I had previously imagined. I think I now understand why we call it 'platonic love,' but I also see how the popular notion is just a shallow interpretation of Plato's original idea. The kind of love he describes isn't merely a relationship devoid of romantic interest, as we often interpret it today. Instead, it represents the most intellectually transformative type of connection, one that guides two individuals toward the Form of Beauty, and eventually to the Forms of Truth and the Good. I've yet to gauge how realistic such a relationship is, but even as an ideal, it presents a picture of love that is worth aspiring to. At the moment of writing this, I'm struggling to recall a more thoughtful or beautiful perspective on love than Plato's, though I might be biased due to how well it resonated with me.

As for letters VII & VIII, man what a drama. Especially the former, straight up an episode of Game of Thrones. I'm disregarding the latter because of how questionable its authenticity is and because most of its contents are already touched on in the letter VII. There, I gotta say, I received an important tip from Plato: I gotta doubt all of his written work when it comes to his view of reality. Thanks a lot my guy. Could've mentioned that earlier, you know....

[Mario · Rating 3 out of 5]

As far as Phaedrus itself goes, it was fine, more or less unremarkable for Plato. The whole thing felt a little less sure of itself than his other dialogues; this is a timid and reluctant Socrates compared to his usual self-assuredness.

The real valuable part of this work was the seventh letter (I found nothing of value in the eighth, and highly doubt its authenticity). It is really interesting that the people who put this book together chose to combine Phaedrus and VII, I think they work really well in tandem (it might be a common choice, I'm not going to bother to check). The Seventh's focus on the forms and its admonishment that real learning can't be done through reading but only through direct conversation absolutely explains some of the thinking behind what Socrates was saying in the dialogue.

[Dimfy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read the Phaedrus and parts of the seventh letter for a course on language, communication and philosophical form in Plato's work. I think the Phaedrus is my favourite dialogue so far, mostly because of the playful way in which Socrates' and Phaedrus' relationship is presented. But I must say I'm not a fan of this translation. For those who read dutch I recommend Charles Hupperts' 2016 translation; he offers many more interesting notes on (cultural) context which make the dialogue even more interesting.

[Richard Clay]

Like some other volumes of Plato, I find myself unable to give this a 'star' rating because the ways of thinking are so alien to me - and, I suspect, to almost anyone alive today - that I can come to no conclusions about them. Clearly, though, it covers some of the same ground as 'The Republic' and 'The Symposium' though, to my mind, it does so in a more readable fashion. And I don't think this is down to the translation, either.

[Petrus · Rating 5 out of 5]

Seventh letter. Plato's indirect warning to future "philosophers" (do we understand philosophy in the same sense as Plato did? May we instead call them philosophists, or naturalists/anti-Platonists as Lloyd P. Gerson preferred to call them?), which was either dodged, misunderstood or both. Got the feeling I will be revisiting Plato, especially his Republic and finally digging into his Laws some time in near future.

[Scott · Rating 4 out of 5]

Phaedrus is fairly late as Plato dialogues go – the subject is rhetoric but a fair portion of the book is a monologue by Socrates on the subject of love. Plato is in his usual form, generally interesting but not convincing. Plato’s seventh and eighth letters are included which give an interesting account of his getting involved in Sicilian politics, with unfortunate results for all involved.

[Quinn Stravach · Rating 4 out of 5]

a little underwhelming compared to other Plato works and not a huge takeaway but still a good example of his writing style and prose, I enjoyed it as light reading

[Theryn Fleming · Rating 3 out of 5]

Phaedrus is a dialogue between Phaedrus and Socrates, in which Socrates argues that good rhetoricians need to know the truth of what they're arguing. Rhetoricians who are ignorant of the truth are likely to be misled by their own arguments. (And here I couldn't help but think of Stephen Colbert and truthiness!) For my purposes (discussing orality vs. literacy), the key part of Phaedrus is the last five or six pages, in which Socrates argues that writing is inferior to oral dialogue because oral speakers can tailor arguments to the audience, enter into dialogue with listeners, etc. while writers cannot.

[Lysergius · Rating 4 out of 5]

Perhaps it is the translation, but this reads surprisingly well. Having done philosophy 40 years ago and dipped into Plato, it is interesting to go back and try to understand which he was so influential. I think it is true to say that the Greeks were the first society to have a written culture, and this perhaps what makes this little volume so persuasive.

This is fairly easy to read, the actual Greek is kept to a minimum and restricted to clarification of the choice of alternate key terms such as strategos and tyrannous, or place and person names.

[Mike · Rating 3 out of 5]

what strikes me most about this is the way in which plato's sexuality tends to get swept under the rug. i mean, this is ostensibly a dialogue about the power and morality of rhetoric, but it's all takes place through a debate over what kind of lover (i.e. older man) a boy should choose. which brings to mind the close relationship between rhetoric (persuasive speech) and sexuality, on a macro level, like the "debate" over abortion, or a micro level, e.g. your run-of-the-mill drunken seduction...

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

"...men of those days, because they were not wise like you moderns, were content because of their simplicity to listen to oak and rock, provided only that what they said were true; but for you, Phaedrus, perhaps it makes a difference who the speaker is and where he comes from..."

The philosophy is strong and metaphysically rigorous, but the best parts are Socrates's strange parables that make him seem completely distempered but nonetheless go entirely unquestioned by the slow-minded Phaedrus.

[Jacob · Rating 4 out of 5]

The tail end of Plato's Phaedrus is notable for the story of Thamus's rejection of Thoth's gift of writing, a story which gets a lot of play in certain corners of 20th-century theory and philosophy.

[KFed · Rating 3 out of 5]

'What we talk about when we talk about love,' Plato-style.

Turns out we're talking about the relationship our soul had with the heavens, beauty and divine truth before it 'lost its wings' and entered our body. Who knew?

[A.f. · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read parts of this in college and while some were nodding off to sleep, I found it INCREDIBLY interesting and found that I liked trying to analyze the philosophical dialogues and letters that Plato wrote. I look forward to going back to it one of these days...

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good story.

[Maughn Gregory · Rating 4 out of 5]

Socrates' description of the soul of the lover painfully sprouting feathers upon meeting the beloved is one of the most beautiful and erotic passages in western literature.

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Useful.

[Ch J Loveall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Only read Phaedrus to date (6/9/10).

[Alex · Rating 5 out of 5]

My favourite of the Plato's dialogues that I have read so far.

[Thatsgreateric · Rating 5 out of 5]

The inspiration behind Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

[Sarah]

(Only read The Phaedrus, so no rating).
I came back to Phaedrus after reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, in which the narrator's alter ego is known as Phaedrus. I originally read this text in college, as part of Literary Criticism class. The outline of arguments for and against rhetoric versus philosophy, while heavily weighted, give the reader (or listener, as it should be!) the opportunity to be led, incrementally, as the suggested approach warrants, through a dialectical argument for knowledge, as part of The Good, over the blind rhetorical imprint left by a speech made purely to persuade. Chicken soup for the lawyer's soul? Wink, wink.

[Max · Rating 4 out of 5]

Deeply poetical, I find, despite Plato’s always ironic rejection of such in The Republic! Literarily beautiful, and some good ideas sprout up: the divisions of the soul as a chariot led by the procession of Greek gods; the true art of rhetoric as actual knowledge of the subject one persuades for or against, and the section of Thamus & Theuth (on why speaking is better than writing) is great, too. Also quite a quick read!