[Air-L] history of Plato's Phaedrus as example of moral / media panic?

[Ricardo Rohm]

Dear Charles and Air-lists,

Congrats for this insightful discussion! Really.
This made me also think about one of the questions which concerns,
ultimately, "who opened the box first".
I do not know if this one might be the case, but in my life I have
sometimes faced some so-called scientific discourses which seemed to be
entitled with logical meaning, a valid argument or even deductively
achieved by a plettora of "practical examples or personal experiences".
Whatever.
I have also come accross conclusions from reflexions, surveys and essays,
which have been used strategically for important purposes, decision makings
by governments and corporatios. Many of which have lead humanity to misery,
war, suffering, and oppression: yes oppression!

 Citing and refering to famous classical authors in the past ( and still
nowadays) is an interesting habit which goes far beyond than a simpler
meaning of well- established methodological procedures or even research
designs. Beyond also a rhetoric concern or vanity. Indeed, and I repeat, -
I do not know if the present case in the Air-l here discussed might be
considered in my refkexion! -  I cannot avoid but keep wondering:

To whom would it be useful and empowering to cast away important critics on
new technologies, as well as, who "should" be spared of the so-called "weak
and worthless critics",  once someone or some organization (and if
science,.in general is considered, an Institution) decides that these
critics might be nothing but some kind of moral or psychological disorder
or malfunction ?

On the other hand - (and I might share mine with many 😉 ) - what might
motivate the curiosity towards "opening this box of Plato/Socrates" in the
present moment?
Yes, because this is the time when privacy ans other "boxes and caves seem
to be vanishing" , intentionally produced disinformation is compromising
democracy in many countries, and.so on and forth.

In fact, I decided to share my own concerns here with you because, maybe,
someone becomes intetested in producing some research or personal
discussions at some future phisical venue, strengthening memory and bonds,
instead of "writing or computing".

Best regards,

Ricardo Rohm
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
(at) FAU - Erlangen- Nürnberg


On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, 18:37 Charles M. Ess, <c.m.ess at media.uio.no> wrote:

> Dear AoIRists,
>
> Please be kind and patient with me, recalling that my formal academic
> training was in history of philosophy, German literature, and ancient
> Greek.  I am comparatively still a little wet around the ears with
> regard to media and communication studies - or so it seems in this
> instance.
>
> I keep encountering discussions of moral / media panics that
> consistently invoke Plato's _myth_ of the invention of writing.
>
> This seemingly standard invocation puzzles me greatly for a long list of
> reasons.  I include a short list below for anyone with time and interest
> in looking them over.
>
> The upshot is that I'm left wondering: who - and when - introduced what
> has apparently become received tradition in these domains that the
> mythos (see "2" below) of the invention of writing in the Phaedrus is a
> prime or supportive example moral or media panic?
>
> This is, as they say in administration-speak, an appreciative inquiry.
> I'm genuinely curious for the sake of better understanding how this
> trope first appeared, etc - as well as genuine worried that I may have
> somehow missed something that is considered elementary and obvious for
> those of you with academic training more directly within media and
> communication studies.
>
> Many thanks in advance for any enlightenment and eludation!
> best,
> - charles ess
>
> PS: The short list includes:
> 1) the account is taken (bloody and screaming) out of the context of the
> larger dialogue in the Phaedrus. When read within the larger context -
> beginning with (the young) Phaedrus' effort to impress (perhaps seduce)
> Socrates by memorizing a speech he has copied down on a scroll and
> initially tries to hide from Socrates - the mythos works much more
> immediately as a lightly veiled (and hence, pedagogically speaking,
> likely more successful) chastisement of Phaedrus' efforts at
> dissimulation.  By no means a wholesale critique of writing per se.
> 2) The account is explicitly delivered as a _mythos_ - too easily
> translated as a "myth." But: a _mythos_ in Plato is a technical /
> philosophical form, going well beyond and in some ways directly
> contradicting more everyday notions of "myth" as a false story; a mythos
> is specifically an _oral_ story, with its own set of distinctive
> strengths and limitations. It is often used in Plato when interlocutors,
> attempting to pursue a reasoned argument (logos), come to an impass.
> The relation between mythos and logos is hence often complementary, not
> contradictory.
> 3) It would seem very odd for an author of multiple dialogues, of
> sometimes staggering sophistication and literary nuance, to sincerely
> believe that writing is somehow an entirely suspect technology.
> Different from orality, certainly, as is suggested by the consistent
> presentation of Socrates as an oral teacher, the careful use of mythos
> vs. logos, etc. - but hardly an example of media / moral panic.
> And so on.
> Again: what am I missing?
>
> Again, many thanks,
> - c.
> --
> Professor in Media Studies
> Department of Media and Communication
> University of Oslo
> <http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html>
>
> Postboks 1093
> Blindern 0317
> Oslo, Norway
> c.m.ess at media.uio.no
> _______________________________________________
> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/
>