Joseph Weeks
August 1, 2002
Essay on the relationship between writing and thinking
Writing and speech are inherently linked. A distinction is rarely made in today’s
society between the two. Written speech is viewed as a true and accurate representation
of oral speech. Speech that is neither written nor recorded is rare, and is assumed to have
little value. Today, most “knowledge” is acquired through reading the written word. It
is commonly thought that one can understand most any subject if one devotes enough
time reading the written works of the established authoritorities on the subject. For
example, an individual who wishes to learn philosophy will be expected to read Plato,
Aristotle and Kant, among others. After the said individual has completed his or her
reading of these authors and exhibits a superficial understand of their works, that
individual will be considered “knowledgeable”. Education is acquired nearly exclusively
through reading and writing. The more one reads and presumably understands academic
writings, the more knowledge one is assumed to have. Individuals who are illiterate are
viewed as both ignorant and foolish and are treated as outcasts. This was not always the
case, however.
In ancient Greece, the superiority of writing over oratory had yet to be
established. In fact, there were some that claimed that oral speeches are preferable to the
written word. Both Alcidamas’ Concerning Those Who Write Written Speeches, or
Concerning Sophists and Plato’s Phaedrus make this claim.
Weeks 2
Writing, according to Alcidamas, slows one’s mind, ruins one’s memory and
causes one to be “inconsistent and confused” (Alcidamas 12). Alcidamas states that, “the
power of speaking is able to act as an ally to men’s need; but writing requires leisure and
makes the delays longer than the opportunities” (Alcidamas 5). In Concerning, he assets
that when speeches are written down, the need to memorize anything is removed.
Alcidamas claims that when a speech is written down it becomes less effective due to the
absence of the “power of the speaker to control his words by paying attention to the
effects of his words” (Alcidamas 11). In essence, he is saying that when the spontaneity
of a speech and the unexpected reaction of the audience are not present, the speech looses
most, if not all, of its value. Though he finds an abundance of flaws in writing,
Alcidamas does not totally reject the written word. Rather he merely considers it “to be
inferior to the art of extemporaneous speaking” (Alcidamas 15).
Much like Alcidamas, Plato’s Socrates in Phaedrus feels that writing is inferior to
oral communication. He claims that writing provides “not truth, but only the semblance
of truth” (Plato). Plato’s claim that writing gives an illusionary understanding of the truth
is not unlike his cave allegory in the Republic. In the Republic, Plato describes a group
of prisoners who spend their entire life chained inside a cave perceiving all things
through shadows on the wall There are bound so that they cannot move and can only see
in one direction. The prisoners’ conception of “the truth would be literally nothing but
the shadows of the images” (Plato Republic VII). This same concept is applicable in
Phaedrus. Individuals who acquire and defend their understanding of the truth through
reading and writing are, like the prisoners, blind to the reality of the truth, according to
Weeks 3
Plato. He later states that “writing is unfortunately like painting; for the creations of the
painter have the attitude of life, and yet if you ask them a question they preserve a solemn
silence” (Plato).
After considering both Alcidamas and Plato’s stance on writing, one is struck by
the paradox of their claim. If writing teaches nothing but an illusionary understanding of
the truth, then why write an essay critizing it? It seems absurd to preach against a
concept by using that very concept to establish one’s argument. However, it is only
because of their inconsistency that we are able to possess any knowledge of their
arguments against the written word. So in this regard, Alcidamas and Plato also
indirectly make an argument for the value of writing through their essays.
Methods of “writing” exist today that were not available in the days of Alcidamas
and Plato. Devises such as audio and video recorders change the way speech can be
represented outside of the original context. Would a video recording of a speech be an
acceptable way to acquire knowledge to Alcidamas and Plato? It seems unlikely, for
several reasons. First, the speaker would not have the influence of individual watching
them speak. Second, the need to memorize would not be present because the tape could
be played over and over again. Third, the tape would, like writing, be merely a
representation of the actual speech.
Both positive and negative consequence can be associated with writing. It would
be foolish to adopt one position or the other as absolutely correct. Plato claims that
writing is merely a representation of speech is clearly accurate. However, it is unclear
whether this negates the value of writing. In making a comparison between writing and
Weeks 4
art, Plato muddied the water on this issue. While art is only a representation of nature
and reality, it can be both enjoyable and instructional. Art allows one to appreciate the
object of inspiration in a new and different way. Perhaps, in the same way, writing
allows us to perceive oral communication in positive and enlightening ways.
It is also true that writing allows society to be constructed in a much more precise
and reliable fashion. Without writing, details can easily be confused. While we may
have handicapped our abilities to remember, we have, at the same time, enabled ourselves
to have more information at our disposal. It is clear that regardless of one’s capacity to
remember, one could never recall all of the facts in an encyclopedia or all of the words in
a dictionary.
Nevertheless, it seems that our literate culture value quantity over quality.
Perhaps a hybrid between the oral and written learning tradition would be a better system.
A combination could enable society to retain its vast network of information, while at the
same time increasing its level of memory and comprehension. However, one’s feelings
on writing are of little consequence in today’s society. There is no denying that one must
deal with the written word to survive.
Weeks 5
Works Cited
Alcidamas. Readings from Classical Rhetoric. Eds. Patricia P. Matsen, Philip Rollinson,
Marion Sousa. Southern Illinios UP, 1990. Trans. from the Greek by Patricia P
Matsen, 1989. 37 – 42.
Plato. Phaedrus Translated by Benjamin Jowett. 360 BC
Plato. Republic. Translated by Benjamin Jowett
http://www.constitution.org/pla/repub_07.htm