Isocrates

Isocrates makes some interesting points.

He believes that oration is an art form, and because of such he believes that the way many sophists taught the art of oration was wrong. They applied far too many rules and regulations, in an attempt to make oration more of a science. Isocrates didn't like this. He was a strong believer in kairos, or fitness for the situation. This means that there are no hard and fast rules that can be applied to oration for every situation is unique and as such every situation requires a completely different approach. This plays strongly into another one of Isocrates beliefs, that oration is heavily reliant on natural ability. One can be instructed by another in the art of oration but unless they have the god given ability it will all be for naught. He also distanced himself from other sophists of in the way he taught. He didn't travel around teaching, rather he stayed in one place in order to better tutor his pupils for years at a time.

I think that Isocrates cared more about the actual art of oration than other sophists, who I think cared more about the business of teaching for profit. Part of the reason that the sophists tried to apply so many rules and guidelines to oration is that it makes it easier to teach to more people.

Gorgias

First and foremost, I gotta give Gorgias credit; he is one hell of a BSer.

I actually found his four arguments on Helen to be rather clever, and very enjoyable. My personal favorite has got to be his will of the gods idea. I think it makes the most sense in the context of the time in which it was written. Now I'm obviously not saying that I believe in Zues or any of those guys, I'm just saying that divine intervention is a pretty darn good reason for someone to do something. Gorgias says, "god's predetermination cannot be hindered by human predetermination." It is, in my opinion, the ultimate, unbeatable argument. One that people in power have been using for many, many years. The God's will argument. If God is all powerful and controls everything, and he (or she) decides something is to be, then of course all of us mere mortals are completely powerless to change this. You killed your wife? Hey man, what was I supposed to do? It was ordained by the Gods. However, I think that as a rhetorician it's a rather flimsy, low-blow of an argument, simply because it can't be argued against.