“The Phaedrus”

Reading Phaedrus proved to be difficult for me,I have not read much work written from this time period or style. The actual language was easily understood but the sentence structure was what tripped me up. Sentences went on forever and I had a hard time keeping track of the subject. As I read the work I also had to continually remind myself to read it as a conversation, almost having to switch my voice in my head to keep the two voices separate. To read the piece easily a general knowledge of Plato and his works would be beneficial. To grasp the piece in the context we are looking at I had to keep in mind as the greater audience should that being able to recall speeches verbatim was prestigious and allowed power.

When remarking on the speech Socrates at first claims he does not have the knowledge to do so and that if he were to critique it the wise men before him would look down upon him. Later however, Socrates admits he just thought the speech was bad.

Socrates has a very clear way he believes that memory is formed and recalled. He has the ability to recall speeches perfectly and believes this is a valuable skill as he uses the speeches he has memorized to critique others. In this way I find the way you look at memory and the way Socrates looks at memory very similar. Reading several texts and gaining knowledge. Socrates also believes that by witnessing the speech first hand or hearing it from another will further sustain the memory. However, "your" ideas of memory differ in that by writing a written response you formulate opinions about the texts content and critique structure as well as using it as another concrete way to remember texts. This idea that writing something is a tangible way to remember content.