Why did Plato write??

Medieval portrayal of Socrates and his greatest pupil, Plato.

"The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato. I do not mean the systematic scheme of thought which scholars have doubtfully extracted from his writings. I allude to the wealth of general ideas scattered through them."

A. N. Whitehead, Process and Reality, p.39

    If you think about philosophy, it's about as dependent on writing as math. Formulating thoughts in the air is nearly impossible for me, and certainly impossible  for anyone else to understand (just think of how much harder it is to spell a word out loud than to write it down-- in a spelling bee I'd be thinking,"I could do this if i had a pen and paper..")

      However, we do know that Socrates didn't write a line of his thoughts, and he's considered the father of Greek philosophy and modern thought! We only know the things he said indirectly, kind of like how we have the teachings of Jesus Christ though we don't have his direct account--in this way the two have often been compared, because it has only been through the records of others that we know anything of them.  

     The written word, to Socrates, was as a child without a father: unable to protect itself. He said that writing is deceptive like a painting-- paintings portray things that are falsely living and can't answer questions, just as books can indicate things but cannot give further explanation or answers to questions. Once a man writes down his thoughts, he loses control of them, soon his words become a toy for everyone to play with--written words are vulnerable to having their true meaning lost to them. Socrates had no school, no books, he preferred to a "living" philosophy made of conversation with people he met on the streets. Philosophy was to be made in common with others, the research was made orally. So, even though in our minds philosophy is often represented by great literary works (Kant, Hegel, Descartes...), philosophy is not so clearly related to literacy.

     If Socrates was so opposed to writing, as we talked about in class, and he indoctrinated that belief into his greatest pupil, Plato, why, then, did Plato write?? 

    Plato wasn't the disobedient child, he agreed completely with Socrates on the issue of writing  versus speaking. He warned the world of the dangers of written works. Plato even made up a myth about the Egyptian god Theuth discovering the art of fixing knowledge with signs.  The wise king Thamous condemned the writing, however, on the grounds that it will cause men to lose their faculty of memory and will cause them to be filled with "knowledges" of various kind without having received  true teaching. Men will not be learned, though they will know a few things.

     Plato believed that oral discourse is better than the written one because it's easier to cater to your audience. Also, you don't have to divulge everything to everyone. (Plato had had a bad experience with mass communication though, which is probably what made him suspicious of it. What happened was he tried to hold a public conference on "the Good", and everyone who came assumed it would be about health, happiness, and wealth. His conferenced failed miserably once everyone realized he was there to talk about math the whole time. From then on he opted to speak only to trusted listeners...)

    Some scholars believe that what Plato did write would be considered elementary compared to those things he taught orally. In some of Aristotle's works and others, there are indications of things that Plato taught that we have no record of. Chosen pupils at Plato's school, the Academy, were probably the only ones to receive his unrecorded doctrines! 

  

   One thing about written words back then, though, was that things that were written were meant to be read aloud. Saint Augustine, who we talked about in class, was surprised to see Saint Ambrosius reading "with the eyes only" when everyone else read by giving voice to the text--even if you were just reading to yourself. (picture a monk reading out loud to himself... haha). Ancient writing has certain characteristics because of this connection between literacy and orality. 

   So, if Plato spent so much energy demonstrating his opposition to writing, why contradict himself by writing as much as he did, by writing at all??

Justifications

     For one, Plato lived his life to imitate divinity--we do it too, I'm Trying to be like Jesus, anyone? Plato knew that God had visible and invisible works, so he decided to create his own visible works in the form of books (his invisible ones being the high thoughts "inscribed in his pupils souls"1).

    For two, Plato doesn't necessarily condemn the technical aspect of writing that is a matter of logos, what he's opposed to is the "orphic" type of writing characterized by flowery language and copying the thoughts of others without the effort of committing them to memory, the kind that's ingenuous. 

    So, Plato began writing, and was justified in doing so. As he wrote, he developed some strong opinions about writing, which he then wrote about. I mean, he is Plato. 

Writing. The RIGHT way. 

     The art of writing, for Plato, was in making a "test" for the reader-- the meaning is hidden from those who do not pay close attention. Like the parables that Jesus taught, Plato believed texts should be silent to some while full of meaning to others. All that is necessary should be found in the text, though the deep meaning is not found by those who read without understanding. The quality of the reader gives text its value. 

Four Rules for Writing by Plato

1. Organicity: text must be organized like a living being, having a body, head, and feet/tail that are CONNECTED. Most of Plato's writings had a body with a prologue and an epilogue (both of which contributed to the meaning of the work, the two extremities are not to be mere theatrical necessities.)
2. Beginnning: I'm sure that in every English class our teachers have expressed the importance of a "hook" to draw the reader in and command their attention--Plato taught this! Something else should signify the beginning of a text than the fact that it is the first thing the reader sees, the beginning of any written work should indicate the meaning of the whole. He even says in his book Laws "every single law should have a suitable preamble at the beginning; for that which is to follow is most important, and it makes all the difference whether we clearly remember the preambles or not."3
3. Measure: no mechanical proportion between the parts of a text, circumstance determines  this. (this is strictly prose: haikus and limericks obviously have strict "measure"...) 
4. Imitation: Whatever you're talking about in your writing, imitate the nature of your subject in the way you write. "Words are akin to the matter which they describe." We do this every time we write--our diction relates directly to the meaning we are trying to convey.

    The transition from oral tradition to written language is interesting to read about, especially through the actions of one who was so against written language at first. I almost feel that Plato felt a sense of betrayal when he began writing, but he obviously embraced it with open arms eventually! Thank goodness for us that Plato did decide to write--I totally recognize their influence on the way I was taught to write and the way I do write. It is because of Plato's writings that his doctrine has had so profound an influence on the world.