Feb 12
What’s Helen to Gorgias?
One of the challenges of reading Gorgias’ “Encomium of Helen” is working out why he takes the trouble to defend the reputation of a fictional character: it’s a bit like someone standing up to celebrate Scrooge or pour scorn upon Santa Claus.
Reread Gorgias (link), then consider the following:
- When King says repeatedly “Now is the time…. Now is the time….” we get the sense that he was responding to an audience that thought now was not the time to address the longstanding legacy of slavery. Similarly when King says “We cannot be satisfied…. We cannot be satisfied….” he’s writing for people who thought that Black Americans should be satisfied with the progress made so far. By a similar logic, what beliefs about Helen, would you guess, is Gorgias responding to? In your answer, point to a specific passage in his speech.
- Based on Bernard Evslin’s summary of Helen’s life (Gods, Demigods and Demons, pp 89-91) give a brief summary of the argument you’d make for Helen’s innocence before present-day jury.
- What sort of precedent does Gorgias set in ¶6 of his speech, when he speaks of the power of fate in human affairs? Do subsequent ¶s make this precedent better or worse? To put it another way, if we agree with Gorgias that Helen should go free, how might that reasoning impact our future legal decisions?
Answer ONE of these questions in a short ¶ and post it in the comments below. Please reload the page before posting, so your answer doesn’t simply duplicate someone else’s answer.
1. What prior belief about Helen is Gorgias responding to?
2. How would you argue Helen’s innocence to a 21st century juiry?
3. The precedent set by Gorgias’ defense of Helen.
Gorgias argue that a justified decision can’t be made only by examining the action. Subjective factors should be viewed as well as objective factors. He proposes that, Helen is influenced by deceptive words and speeches, as well as affection. These are way beyond Helen’s own control. Since Helen’s motive is not unjust, it doesn’t make sense to blame Helen. She should be pitied rather than blamed because she is unfortunate to be affected by fatal factors.
Gorgias also said that women are more likely to be emotionally affected, and stated that as genetic. The precedent is clear that one person should not be blamed If he or she doesn’t intend to do harmful deeds. If one is guided by God or irresistible fate, he or she can be pitied for being unfortunately guided by these factors. Namely, the standard for determining guilty is mainly subjective, not objective.