Blog Post #4 (Final Post) - The Platonic Critique of Writing - By Sarah Humphreys

The Platonic Critique of Writing - By Sarah Humphreys

In this course, the platonic critique of writing was very fascinating, so for this last post, I will discuss this critique and present a few discussion questions to reflect on. The platonic critique of writing includes the platonic criticism of the written word, examining Socrates's appraisal of writing. Socrates believes that writing is not an effective communication form as it lacks adequate contexts of speech, which include an individual's nonverbal cues and body language, which are used to provide an extensive understanding of what an individual is trying to convey. 

Socrates suggests that without this understanding of conveyance, there is a risk of misinterpretation as the written word does not include emotion, and as stated in Plato's Phaedrus is soulless, corrupting the integrity of the human soul (Herman, 2022). Socrates also mentions how writing can undermine memory and create distortion; altering an idea that appears different in reality. It is clear that Socrates is not a fan of writing, and personally, I agree with Socrates's argument that face-to-face communication is more effective than writing, however, I do not believe that writing is entirely soulless. 

Writing has the power to share knowledge with large audiences. This knowledge can be truthful and expressive with the power of words. However, Socrates has a point that misinterpretation and misinformation can occur, however, the digital age allows individuals to contradict the written word, add opinions, and formulate discussions online. This provides the written word with a conversation... applications like Twitter, Byzan, TikTok, and so many more provide a space for discussion on topics and written text that can expose any dishonesty that a written piece may possess. Another way the digital age has enhanced writing is through the use of emojis. Socrates argues in Plato's Phaedrus that writing is lifeless, suggesting there is no emotion in written words, however, emojis have allowed users in the digital age to converse and add emojis conveying the emotion associated with a message. Although these examples are not as effective as face-to-face communication, they add life to the written word, methods which Socrates may appreciate. 

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you agree that face-to-face communication is more effective than writing?

2. Do you believe online discourse and emojis add life to writing?

3. Do you think Socrates may have an appreciation for online discourse and emojis? maybe to an extent?