Phaedrus is a dialogue between Phaedrus and Socrates, in which Socrates argues that good rhetoricians need to know the truth of what they're arguing. Rhetoricians who are ignorant of the truth are likely to be misled by their own arguments. (And here I couldn't help but think of Stephen Colbert and truthiness!) For my purposes (discussing orality vs. literacy), the key part of Phaedrus is the last five or six pages, in which Socrates argues that writing is inferior to oral dialogue because oral speakers can tailor arguments to the audience, enter into dialogue with listeners, etc. while writers cannot.

I read parts of this in college and while some were nodding off to sleep, I found it INCREDIBLY interesting and found that I liked trying to analyze the philosophical dialogues and letters that Plato wrote. I look forward to going back to it one of these days...

'What we talk about when we talk about love,' Plato-style.

Turns out we're talking about the relationship our soul had with the heavens, beauty and divine truth before it 'lost its wings' and entered our body. Who knew?

Perhaps it is the translation, but this reads surprisingly well. Having done philosophy 40 years ago and dipped into Plato, it is interesting to go back and try to understand which he was so influential. I think it is true to say that the Greeks were the first society to have a written culture, and this perhaps what makes this little volume so persuasive.

This is fairly easy to read, the actual Greek is kept to a minimum and restricted to clarification of the choice of alternate key terms such as strategos and tyrannous, or place and person names.

Useful.

The Phaedrus helped me understand Plato better after diving into his other great dialogues. I observed Plato further developing his stance on love, distinguishing it from the love we commonly understand, such as romantic, erotic, familial, etc.

One dumb impression I had, much like in Symposium, is that his descriptions of love come across as though he is intent on redefining love to his standards, almost as if he did not fit in with the classical notions of love in his time. It has that "I'm quirky" or, "I'm not like the other girls" energy. But these are the kind of remarks my mind spawns at me as I wash dishes. 

More seriously, I've been fond of Plato's exposition on absolute love from the Symposium ever since I first encountered it in a first-year philosophy course. The way he develops this notion within his metaphysical framework is intriguing. If I were to create a theory to describe reality, love wouldn't be my first choice--yet that boy Platon makes it foundational, and somehow it is compelling. When I encounter metaphysical frameworks, they often struggle with ethical grounding, but Plato’s perspective nails that part from the outset. 

Overall, reading both the Phaedrus and the letters, I've come away with a view of Plato as a more compassionate and ethical figure than I had previously imagined. I think I now understand why we call it 'platonic love,' but I also see how the popular notion is just a shallow interpretation of Plato's original idea. The kind of love he describes isn't merely a relationship devoid of romantic interest, as we often interpret it today. Instead, it represents the most intellectually transformative type of connection, one that guides two individuals toward the Form of Beauty, and eventually to the Forms of Truth and the Good. I've yet to gauge how realistic such a relationship is, but even as an ideal, it presents a picture of love that is worth aspiring to. At the moment of writing this, I'm struggling to recall a more thoughtful or beautiful perspective on love than Plato's, though I might be biased due to how well it resonated with me.

As for letters VII & VIII, man what a drama. Especially the former, straight up an episode of Game of Thrones. I'm disregarding the latter because of how questionable its authenticity is and because most of its contents are already touched on in the letter VII. There, I gotta say, I received an important tip from Plato: I gotta doubt all of his written work when it comes to his view of reality. Thanks a lot my guy. Could've mentioned that earlier, you know....

As far as Phaedrus itself goes, it was fine, more or less unremarkable for Plato. The whole thing felt a little less sure of itself than his other dialogues; this is a timid and reluctant Socrates compared to his usual self-assuredness.

The real valuable part of this work was the seventh letter (I found nothing of value in the eighth, and highly doubt its authenticity). It is really interesting that the people who put this book together chose to combine Phaedrus and VII, I think they work really well in tandem (it might be a common choice, I'm not going to bother to check). The Seventh's focus on the forms and its admonishment that real learning can't be done through reading but only through direct conversation absolutely explains some of the thinking behind what Socrates was saying in the dialogue.

The inspiration behind Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

Like some other volumes of Plato, I find myself unable to give this a 'star' rating because the ways of thinking are so alien to me - and, I suspect, to almost anyone alive today - that I can come to no conclusions about them. Clearly, though, it covers some of the same ground as 'The Republic' and 'The Symposium' though, to my mind, it does so in a more readable fashion. And I don't think this is down to the translation, either.

what strikes me most about this is the way in which plato's sexuality tends to get swept under the rug. i mean, this is ostensibly a dialogue about the power and morality of rhetoric, but it's all takes place through a debate over what kind of lover (i.e. older man) a boy should choose. which brings to mind the close relationship between rhetoric (persuasive speech) and sexuality, on a macro level, like the "debate" over abortion, or a micro level, e.g. your run-of-the-mill drunken seduction...

Only read Phaedrus to date (6/9/10).

"...men of those days, because they were not wise like you moderns, were content because of their simplicity to listen to oak and rock, provided only that what they said were true; but for you, Phaedrus, perhaps it makes a difference who the speaker is and where he comes from..."

The philosophy is strong and metaphysically rigorous, but the best parts are Socrates's strange parables that make him seem completely distempered but nonetheless go entirely unquestioned by the slow-minded Phaedrus.