In response to Casey's First Question for Verderber

First, Casey states that in Plato's time he (Plato) suggested that written word was not relevant and was only spoken and oral words were of essence. In addition to this she says that she doesn't agree with his philosophy. In this sense, I completely agree with what she is saying.

It is hard to believe that now, in our day and age that anyone could possibly agree with Plato's philosophy on discrediting the written word. Take poetry and other forms of abstract communication for instance, they are still being published to communicate a message to others. In this context, abstract communication can take on many forms, it can interpreted into many different messages depending upon who is reading it and what their experiences have been. Poetry and other forms of writing can literally mean one thing, and have deeper and more metaphorical meaning beyond.

The mass media definitely comes into play when talking about how the two very different societies have evolved. Firstly, the society that Plato was integrated into was the Greek society, which values differ greatly from the American society. Americans place a high emphasis on individualism and Greeks are almost opposite in their view valuing group association high. This shows how the communication would differ greatly. People today are too busy to gather around in groups, other than their families to share stories about what has happened in history. Today in school, history is mainly taught through textbooks which only prove to be something more to disprove what Plato is saying. All our mass media, or for the most part, it highly includes the written word. This class for example, uses blogs as a way to create discussion outside the classroom; it uses written word to provoke thought among others. Sitting in the classroom, with oral word many students become shy at the thought of speaking their own opinions in a public setting, understandably. In this aspect the written word helps and provides ground in which anyone can express their thoughts without being outwardly and directly judged by others.

Maybe oral word was valued back in Plato's day, but now the world hs evolved and as it has people have slowly changed with the times. People started writing down their innermost thoughts in a journal, now people are blogging all over the internet how they feel through written word. Plato obviously didn't see this coming. He could have acknowledged the presence of written documents in the government, as they did have a system for that. How could anyone keep to a contract or their "word" if they didn't have anything written down. There are dishonest people in this world, and I can only imagine that there were just as many back then, wasn't that ever taken into consideration when he pondered this thought?

In Plato's day, people pretty much conformed to the government's ideas and rules, if you didn't you were punished. Now today people's ideas are challenged and written word provokes thought, perhaps at times action. Where would we be without written word? Our society probably wouldn’t have grown to the extent that it has and we wouldn't have as many great thinkers of our time without written word, so then isn't all communication necessary in each a different sense? I believe every form of communication is necessary, and to say that one is or is not, it is ignorant and would not be thinking of what the future may hold.