In the Phaedrus (274c), Plato introduces many of the issues that concern us in this

paper, including memory, truth, technology, authenticity, and identity. Socrates tells
a story about the invention of arts and technologies, including writing. In the story
Egyptian King Ammon disputes the claim made by a god named Theuth that, writing
“is a branch of learning that will make the people of Egypt wiser and improve their
memories.” According to Socrates’ story, Ammon said:

“If men learn this, 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. What you have discovered is a recipe not for memory, but for
reminder. And it is no true wisdom that you offer your disciples, but only its
semblance, 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.”

The give and take that follows is full of irony as Phaedrus questions the authenticity
of Socrates’ story, leading Socrates to praise the wisdom of Phaedrus and the
younger generation for distinguishing the truth of an utterance not just on the basis
of truth or falsity but also on the basis of who the speaker is and what country he
comes from. Earlier, simpler folk, according to Socrates, “were content in their
simplicity to listen to trees or rocks, provided these told the truth.”

Is that enough, or do we need to dig into the layers more?

---------------------

Plato, Collected Dialogues, (New York: Bollingen Foundation, 1961)

Phaedrus 274 c

SOCRATES: I can tell you the tradition that has come down from our forefathers,
but they alone know the truth of it. However, if we could discover that for ourselves,
should we still be concerned with the fancies of mankind?
PHAEDRUS: What a ridiculous question! But tell me the tradition you speak of.
S0CRATES: Very well. The story is that in the region of Naucratis in Egypt there
dwelt one of the old gods of the country, the god to whom the bird called Ibis is
sacred, his own name being Theuth. He it was that invented number and calculation,
geometry and astronomy, not to speak of draughts and dice, and above all writing.
Now the king of the whole country at that time was Thamus, who dwelt in the great
city of Upper Egypt which the Greeks call Egyptian Thebes while Thamus they call
Ammon. To him came Theuth, and revealed his arts, saying that they ought to be
passed on to the Egyptians in general. Thamus asked what was the use of them all,
and when Theuth explained, he condemned what he thought the bad points and
praised what he thought the good. On each art, we are told, Thamus had plenty of
views both for and against; it would take too long to give them in detail. But when it
came to writing Theuth said, ‘Here, 0 king, is a branch of learning that will make the
people of Egypt wiser and improve their memories; my discovery provides a recipe
for memory and wisdom.’ But the king answered and said, ‘0 man full of arts, to one
it is given to create the things of art, and to another to judge what measure of harm
and of profit they have for those that shall employ them. And so it is that you, by
reason of your tender regard for the writing that is your offspring, have declared the
very opposite of its true effect. If men learn this, 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. What you have discovered is a recipe not for memory, but for
reminder. And it is no true wisdom that you offer your disciples, but only its
semblance, 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.’

PHAEDRUS: It is easy for you, Socrates, to make up tales from Egypt or anywhere
else you fancy.

SOCRATES: Oh, but the authorities of the temple of Zeus at Dodona, my friend, said
that the first prophetic utterances came from an oak tree. In fact the people of those
days, lacking the wisdom of you young people, were content in their simplicity to
listen to trees or rocks, provided these told the truth. For you apparently it makes a
difference who the speaker is, and what country he comes from; you don’t merely
ask whether what he says is true or false.

PHAEDRUS: I deserve your rebuke, and I agree that the man of Thebes is right in
what he said about writing.

SOCRATES: Then anyone who leaves behind him a written manual, and likewise
anyone who takes it over from him, on the supposition that such writing will provide
something reliable and permanent, must be exceedingly simple-minded; he must
really be ignorant of Ammon’s utterance, if he imagines that written words can do
anything more than remind one who knows that which the writing is concerned with.
PHAEDRUS: Very true.
SOCRATES: You know, Phaedrus, that’s the strange thing about Writing, which
makes it truly analogous to painting. 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 you just the same thing forever. And once a thing is
put in writing, the composition, whatever it may be, drifts all over the place, getting
into the hands not only of those who understand it, but equally of those who have no
business with it; It doesn’t know how to address the right people, and not address
the wrong. And when it is ill-treated and unfairly abused it always needs its parent to
come to its help, being unable to defend or help itself.
PHAEDRU S: Once again you are perfectly right.
SOCRATES: But now tell me, is there another sort of discourse, that is brother to
the written speech, but of unquestioned legitimacy? Can we see how it originates,
and how much better and more effective it is than the other?
PHAEDRUS: What sort of discourse have you now in mind, and what is its origin?
SOCRATES: The sort that goes together with knowledge, and is written in the soul
of the learner, that can defend itself, and knows to whom it should speak and to
whom it should say nothing.
PHAEDRUS: You mean no dead discourse, but the living speech, the original of
which the written discourse may fairly be called a kind image.
SOCRATES: Precisely. And now tell me this. If a sensible farmer had some seeds to
look after and wanted them to bear fruit, would he with serious intent plant them
during the summer in a garden of Adonis, and enjoy watching it producing fine fruit
within eight days? If he did so at all, wouldn’t it be in a holiday spirit, just by way of
pastime? For serious purposes wouldn’t he behave like a scientific farmer, sow his
seeds in suitable soil, and be well content if they came to maturity within eight
months?
PHAEDRUS: I think we may distinguish as you say, Socrates, between what the
farmer would do seriously and what he would do in a different spirit.