Both Protagoras and Plato began their arguments strongly. I was unable to pick a side throughout most of the trial, actually. And because of this, I was wondering just how useful rhetoric really is. Surely if it is as important and astounding as Protagoras was claiming, there would not be a shadow of a doubt that he was correct. It was not so until about three-quarters of the way through their argument.
I began to notice a shift in the two men's demeanor... Plato began to seem worried that his case would not hold, while Protagoras was becoming more confident. I pondered this thought for some time before realizing that Plato was bowing down because he, too, was beginning to see the light in Protagoras's ways. Protagoras was right on when he said that rhetoric was needed in order to find our own individual truths. I understand that Plato's way of thinking is the more traditional, popular belief, but I have no doubt that the roles will soon be switched once everyone begins to see the things that rhetoric can do for them. Rhetoric is not just a way to make money! It is a way to discuss, to promote change, and most of all to discover all of the brilliant facets of this life. If we do not discuss and use a rhetorical way of thinking, how can we ever hope to progress? If we stuck with the dialectic way of thinking and being, then we would be just that--stuck. We would never invent new things or think about things any differently. The way I see it, we have always been rhetorical beings, we just never knew it.
Therefore, with all of this being said, I rule in the case of Protagoras vs. Plato, in favor of Protagoras, the teacher of rhetoric--the teacher of the future.