Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Rhetoric
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== Aristotle ==== [[File:Aristotle Altemps Inv8575.jpg|thumb|upright=0.8|A marble bust of Aristotle]] {{Main|Rhetoric (Aristotle)}}Aristotle: Rhetoric is an antistrophes to dialectic. "Let rhetoric [be defined as] an ability [dynamis], in each [particular] case, to see the available means of persuasion." "Rhetoric is a counterpart of dialectic" — an art of practical civic reasoning, applied to deliberative, judicial, and "display" speeches in political assemblies, lawcourts, and other public gatherings.{{more citations needed section|date=September 2013}} [[Aristotle]] ({{BCE|384–322}}) was a student of Plato who set forth an extended treatise on rhetoric that still repays careful study today. In the first sentence of ''[[Rhetoric (Aristotle)|The Art of Rhetoric]]'', Aristotle says that "rhetoric is the {{transliteration|grc|[[antistrophe]]}} of dialectic".<ref name=Aristotle>{{cite book|author=Aristotle|title=Rhetoric}}</ref>{{rp|at=I.1}} As the "{{transliteration|grc|antistrophe}}" of a Greek [[ode]] responds to and is patterned after the structure of the "{{transliteration|grc|[[strophe]]}}" (they form two sections of the whole and are sung by two parts of the chorus), so the art of rhetoric follows and is structurally patterned after the art of dialectic because both are arts of discourse production. While dialectical methods are necessary to find truth in theoretical matters, rhetorical methods are required in practical matters such as adjudicating somebody's guilt or innocence when charged in a court of law, or adjudicating a prudent course of action to be taken in a deliberative assembly. For Plato and Aristotle, dialectic involves persuasion, so when Aristotle says that rhetoric is the {{transliteration|grc|antistrophe}} of dialectic, he means that rhetoric as he uses the term has a domain or scope of application that is parallel to, but different from, the domain or scope of application of dialectic. Claude Pavur explains that "[t]he Greek prefix 'anti' does not merely designate opposition, but it can also mean 'in place of'".<ref>{{cite book|last=Pavur|first=Claude Nicholas|title=Nietzsche Humanist|year=1998|publisher=Marquette University Press|page=129}}</ref> Aristotle's treatise on rhetoric systematically describes civic rhetoric as a human art or skill ({{transliteration|grc|techne}}). It is more of {{clarify|reason=what does that mean?|text=an objective theory|date=September 2023}} than it is an interpretive theory with a rhetorical tradition. Aristotle's art of rhetoric emphasizes persuasion as the purpose of rhetoric. His definition of rhetoric as "the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion", essentially a mode of discovery, limits the art to the inventional process; Aristotle emphasizes the logical aspect of this process. A speaker supports the probability of a message by logical, ethical, and emotional proofs. Aristotle identifies three steps or "offices" of rhetoric—invention, arrangement, and style—and three different types of rhetorical proof:{{r|Aristotle|at=I.2}} ; {{transliteration|grc|[[ethos]]}} : Aristotle's theory of character and how the character and credibility of a speaker can influence an audience to consider him/her to be believable—there being three qualities that contribute to a credible ethos: perceived intelligence, virtuous character, and goodwill ; {{transliteration|grc|[[pathos]]}} : the use of emotional appeals to alter the audience's judgment through metaphor, amplification, storytelling, or presenting the topic in a way that evokes strong emotions in the audience ; {{transliteration|grc|[[logos]]}} : the use of reasoning, either [[Inductive reasoning|inductive]] or [[Deductive reasoning|deductive]], to construct an argument Aristotle emphasized ''[[Deductive reasoning|enthymematic reasoning]]'' as central to the process of rhetorical invention, though later rhetorical theorists placed much less emphasis on it. An "enthymeme" follows the form of a [[syllogism]], however it excludes either the major or minor premise. An enthymeme is persuasive because the audience provides the missing premise. Because the audience participates in providing the missing premise, they are more likely to be persuaded by the message. Aristotle identified three different types or genres of civic rhetoric:{{r|Aristotle|at=I.3}} ; [[Forensic rhetoric|Forensic]] (also known as judicial) : concerned with determining the truth or falseness of events that took place in the past and issues of guilt—for example, in a courtroom{{r|Aristotle|at=I.10–15}} ; [[Deliberative rhetoric|Deliberative]] (also known as political) : concerned with determining whether or not particular actions should or should not be taken in the future—for example, making laws ; [[Epideictic]] (also known as ceremonial) : concerned with praise and blame, values, right and wrong, demonstrating beauty and skill in the present—for example, a eulogy or a wedding toast Another Aristotelian doctrine was the idea of topics (also referred to as [[The Common Topics|common topics]] or commonplaces). Though the term had a wide range of application (as a memory technique or compositional exercise, for example) it most often referred to the "seats of argument"—the list of categories of thought or modes of reasoning—that a speaker could use to generate arguments or proofs. The topics were thus a heuristic or inventional tool designed to help speakers categorize and thus better retain and apply frequently used types of argument. For example, since we often see effects as "like" their causes, one way to invent an argument (about a future effect) is by discussing the cause (which it will be "like"). This and other rhetorical topics derive from Aristotle's belief that there are certain predictable ways in which humans (particularly non-specialists) draw conclusions from premises. Based upon and adapted from his dialectical Topics, the rhetorical topics became a central feature of later rhetorical theorizing, most famously in Cicero's work of that name.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Rhetoric
(section)
Add topic