Isocrates argues that "all general principles" fail, and the only thing that matters is kairos, or the "'fitness for the ocacasion.'" Better defined, kairos is the ability to take advantage of the changing circumstances. In rhetoric, it is often overlooked because of the other three appeals (pathos, ethos, and logos). However, kairos is a huge part of the Sophist movement.
Also, Isocrates tried to dissociate himself from the belief that teachers can TEACH virtue. This is what I completely agree with.
Virtue is a tough word to define, but I like to define it as "moral excellence." To truly be morally excellent is an internal structure or system. This system seems impossible to be taught to someone. Virtue can be learned, but it is learned in a different sense than learning from a teacher or classroom. You tend to learn virtue from experiences, not from someone blabbering about it. It is practical thing that you simply must learn within life. For example, someone may tell you that stealing is morally wrong. However, you will not simply learn from hearing it, you will learn from experiences. Someone may steal something from you, or you may see the consequences of stealing. This molds your ideas far more than just simply hearing about it.
Now, you may say "well, you still learn some sort of virtue from the teacher telling you not to steal." This I will not disagree with. You are given a sort of framework for what is virtuous. Think of this like the foundation to a house. The experiences themselves, however, are the walls, the insulation, the doors, and the decorations to the house. In a way, Isocrates would agree with this. He believed that teachers could be "morally improving." Meaning, as a teacher, you could improve someone's morals, but you cannot create the virtue or moral itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment