PHAEDRUS

While reading Phaedrus one of the main topics into which it delves is rhetoric and whether the spoken or written word is the most adapt. Written text is a sense is immortal.  It never changes, wanes but is always interpreted.  We can assume the writers opinion, however without the chance of discourse or rebuttal with the author, we are still only assuming the final message.  Oration, however, allows us to hear the energy, and rhythm of the author.  Discourse allows us to refine our understand even further into the minds eye of the author.  The obvious disadvantage to oration is obvious, an immediate proximity to the author is needed. Oration also changes as stories are passed down and may (will) change from orator to orator.  So the energy may remain, the context will shift overtime. 


Looking at this in contrast to the lovers and non-lovers:  How can a non-lover understand something they have never delved into.  One may know that water feels cool, wet, refreshing...  but do they know the pure extacy of a refreshing swim on a hot summers day?  One may say that a non-lover may have their wits, but they only know a muddy representation of what it means to truly love.