Gorgias, Encomium of Helen; Isocrates, From Against the Sophists; and Antidosis

I thought that both of these works were really interesting, especially the Georgias, Encomium of Helen. I thought that this piece was fascinating because I never really questioned why we assume that Helen is innocent and I have never heard anyone claim that she wasn't. However, apparently in Georgias' day there were people who thought that the Trojan War was caused by Helen. I also thought that it was interesting because in all of his arguments, Georgias admitted that Helen didn't have a choice in the matter regardless of why it happened. By admitting this, Georgias is also admitting that a woman (even a Spartan woman of high stature) doesn't have the right so say no to a situation like that. However, I did not feel like this work had a solid conclusion and it kind of fell flat in the end, which made it seem less believable to me.


One of the things that stood out to me in the other work is that Isocrates uses both phronēsis and sophia to describe wisdom. Later on in this work people who have wisdom are described using the word sophoi while "those who gain a practical understanding" are those who have phronēsis. I thought that this distinction was interesting because in this work Isocrates is arguing against Sophist rhetoricians. I don't know how the sophists got their name but it is almost funny to me that Isocrates was arguing against wisdom, even in the Greek sense of the word.