Plato’s Surprising Argument Against Writing

Why we should stop reading books and noting things down.

Whether you’re browsing Facebook, reading this article, or leaving a sticky note on the fridge, we all rely on written communication. It’s a simple way to mark down information for others to see.

But this directly opposes the ancient advice of Plato. In 370 BCE, he actively encouraged others to stop writing things down.

Plato is hailed as one of the most influential thinkers in human history. As a 5th Century (BCE) Athenian philosopher, he was taught by Socrates and founded the academy.

The methods he recorded are still respected and followed. Reflecting some of the earliest instances of written dialogue, dialect, and logic. Setting out the Socratic Method (in his elenctic dialogues) and establishing the existence of forms a priori (through reason alone.)

As a student of Socrates, he learned from him directly. But Socrates refused to write anything down. Everything we know about him comes from Plato’s written work. Without his notes, we would have almost no knowledge of them or their teachings.

But his book “Phaedrus,” contains discussions and themes that directly challenged written communication. How ironic, that Plato’s written work challenges the practice of writing.

Why does Plato think this?

Context: During his lifetime, Plato often recorded conversations he had with Socrates.

The Phaedrus (370 BC) is a dialogue between Socrates (the protagonist) and Phaedrus (the interlocutor). The text focuses on rhetoric and persuasion, but contains themes on metempsychosis, writing and love.

It's not entirely known whether these are the words of Socrates, or Plato (speaking through a fictional character with the same name).

The Invention of Writing

Before outlining his critique, Socrates (as outlined by Plato) describes an ancient myth on how writing came to exist. He uses the story of Theuth, an Ancient God who “discovered calculation, geometry, and astronomy.”

One day Theuth and Thamus (the Egyptian King at the time) visit an art gallery. During the day, Thamus asks Theuth to dissect and explain each piece of art.

Impressed by his descriptions, Theuth praises him, but was disappointed that others wouldn’t hear what he had to say. For his descriptions “would take too long to repeat” and their memories wouldn’t be able to recall everything.

In response to this, Theuth came to writing, which he regarded as a “potion of memory and wisdom.” He said:

“O King, here is something that, once learned, will make the Egyptians wiser and will improve their memory.”

Thamus was quick to evaluate writing. Someone needed to objectively judge the benefit or harm it causes.

As the inventor, he experienced an irrational and unconditional affection towards it. Thamus believed this led him to “describe its effects as the opposite of what they really are.” In truth, writing doesn’t help us become smarter and wiser. But why?

Writing Encourages Complacency

Relying on the written word could be intellectually damaging. Rather than exercising our brains to recall information, it encourages us to rely on external texts.

Instead of understanding something and internalizing it, those reliant on it don’t need to remember information. They don’t utilize their brains or try to understand what they read. Instead, when asked a question, these people open a book to a certain page and read the answer like a parrot.

What’s worse is they don’t have the knowledge or apparatus to challenge the things they read. So they tend to accept what’s presented to them.

Modern technology has made a lot of us dependent in this way. Very few of us take the time to read a primary text, internalize and remember the information. Instead, we get our information from Google and Facebook, trusting the answer we’re given.

That’s dangerous. You can’t always trust the things you read online.

Socrates sums this up beautifully (as written by Plato, in the Phaedrus (274b-277a)):

“It will implant forgetfulness in their souls. They will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written, calling things to remembrance no longer from within themselves, but by means of external marks.”

This dependence will help you seem wise and intelligent. You will hear, read and be able to reel off a vast amount of information. But you will not properly know about these things.

These types of people will be difficult to get along with. For they might think they are wise and knowledgeable when they really aren’t.

“It is no true wisdom that you offer your disciples, but only the semblance of wisdom, for by telling them of many things without teaching them you will make them seem to know much while for the most part they know nothing. And as men filled not with wisdom but with the conceit of wisdom they will be a burden to their fellows.”

Writing Is Open to Interpretation

It can be easily misunderstood. Writing preserves information that needs to be deciphered by a human. The interpretation could vary depending on who is reading it. We could unknowingly misunderstand it. But how can we ever know the correct interpretation?

For Socrates, the written word is comparable to art. It represents a snapshot of our understanding, feelings, and knowledge at a certain moment in time. In his words:

“The offsprings of painting [and writing] stand there as if they are alive”

While this is a nice sentiment, it brings a whole host of issues. As time goes on, our understanding and vocabulary change. Words, their connotations, and context all influence how we read a text. So do translations into our native language.

This increases the risk of misinterpreting texts written thousands of years ago.

“Well, then, those who think they can leave written instructions for an art, as well as those who accept them, thinking that writing can yield results that are clear or certain, must be quite naive and truly ignorant.”

How do I know for sure that Socrates intended for his argument to be taken in the way I’m presenting it? We will never know for sure.

It Does Not Hold Up to Scrutiny

What’s worse is that independent, single-person writing can’t protect itself from challenges or misinterpretation.

As a proponent of the Socratic Method, he believed we should push on ideas to discover the truth. If someone claims to know something, we can quiz and challenge them. But the written word can’t respond or explain itself. Hence why, according to Socrates, we can’t be sure whether the original author truly understood. As he puts it:

“The painter’s products stand before us as though they were alive. But if you question them, they maintain a most majestic silence. It is the same with written words. They seem to talk to you as though they were intelligent, but if you ask them anything about what they say from a desire to be instructed they go on telling just the same thing forever.”

Are they just repeating information they read elsewhere? Have they understood it correctly? The written word can’t give you the answers. “It always needs its father’s support; alone, it can neither defend itself nor come to its own support.”

The Power of a Conversation

Knowing this, Socrates believed face-to-face communication was the best way to transmit knowledge. When someone presents an idea to your face, the discourse can be pushed, questioned, improved, and the truth can be teased out.

It also helps us exercise our cognitive faculties. We have to judge the credibility of the person telling us, assess whether what’s said is true, and remember it if we want to recall it later.

It’s why most of Socrates’ work (as documented by Plato,) is written in the form of a dialogue. The protagonist presents ideas, while the interlocutor responds and challenges to help uncover the truth.

The takeaway? Perhaps you should stop trusting texts that present information as fact and claim to “know everything.” Instead, have conversations with other people, assess and critically judge ideas for yourself.

The Solution: Finding a Balance

Much of what Plato (as spoken through Socrates) discussed still rings true today. Some of us still rely on Google for information. Without questioning things, we immediately trust what we read.

Up to this point, Socrates has presented a false dichotomy. Either you become completely reliant on the written word, or you don’t use it at all.

But there’s a middle ground, and that’s what Plato believes we should aim for. We should use written communication to preserve ideas — to pass on the wisdom of Socrates and Plato — but we should do so in a critical way. One that encourages us to assess what we read and to internalize it. That holds up to challenges, and we can know is true.

He calls it the “legitimate type.” Rather than making bold assertions without evidence, it’s a recorded (real-life) conversation where the author presents their ideas. From there, they can be questioned and respond to challenges.

Knowing they can defend themselves, we can be confident the author is a credible source of information — for they clearly know what they’re talking about. Following the recorded discussion, we can also come to know the true intention and interpretation of the piece. This being:

“A discourse that is written down, with knowledge, in the soul of the listener; it can defend itself, and it knows for whom it should speak and for whom it should remain silent.”

Overall, Socrates is encouraging us to think critically. To question the bold, unsupported claims we see around us. To internalize and understand information, rather than reeling it off like a parrot. He believes the best way to do that is through a critical conversation where someone asks questions and challenges what is said. That dialogue should then be recorded so any wisdom is passed on.

It’s by doing so that we uncover the truth.

“Everything is plainer when spoken than when unspoken.” — Socrates

To read more articles like this, join Medium via this link for the price of a cup of coffee a month.

Thanks to Eva Keiffenheim and Max Phillips for feedback and support on this piece.