Rhetoric (Aristotle).html
 
| ca | de | en | es | fr | it | nl | no | pl | pt | ru | ro | fi | sv | tr | vo |


 

Aristotle, copy of a sculpture by Lysippos.

Aristotle's Rhetoric is an ancient Greek treatise on the art of persuasion, dating from the fourth century BCE. In Greek, it is titled ΤΕΧΝΗΣ ΡΗΤΟΡΙΚΗΣ, in Latin Ars Rhetorica. In English, its title varies: typically it is titled the Rhetoric, the Art of Rhetoric, or a Treatise on Rhetoric.

Aristotle is generally credited with developing the basics of the system of rhetoric that "thereafter served as its touchstone" 1, influencing the development of rhetorical theory from ancient through modern times. The Rhetoric is regarded by most rhetoricians as "the most important single work on persuasion ever written." 2 Gross & Walzer concur, indicating that, just as Whitehead considered all Western philosophy a footnote to Plato, "all subsequent rhetorical theory is but a series of responses to issues raised" by Aristotle's Rhetoric. 3This is largely a reflection of disciplinary divisions, dating back to Peter Ramus's attacks on Aristotlean rhetoric in the late 1500s 4 and continuing to the present.5

Like the other works of Aristotle that have survived from antiquity, the Rhetoric seems not to have been intended for publication, being instead a collection of his students' notes in response to his lectures. The treatise shows the development of Aristotle's thought through two different periods while he was in Athens, and illustrates Aristotle's expansion of the study of rhetoric beyond Plato's early criticism of it in the Gorgias (ca. 386 BCE) as immoral, dangerous, and unworthy of serious study.67 Plato's final dialogue on rhetoric, the Phaedrus (ca.370 BCE), offered a more moderate view of rhetoric, acknowledging its value in the hands of a true philosopher (the "midwife of the soul") for "winning the soul through discourse." This dialogue offered Aristotle, first a student and then a teacher at Plato's Academy, a more positive starting point for the development of rhetoric as an art worthy of systematic, scientific study.


Contents

History and Context

The Rhetoric was developed by Aristotle during two periods when he was in Athens, the first between 367 to 347 BCE (when he was seconded to Plato in the Academy), and the second between 335 to 322 BCE (when he was running his own school, the Lyceum).89

The study of rhetoric was contested in classical Greece, with the Sophists on one side and Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle on the other. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle saw rhetoric and poetry as tools that were too often used to manipulate others by trading on emotion and neglecting facts.10 They particularly accused the sophists, including Gorgias and Isocrates, of this. Plato, in particular, laid the blame for the arrest and death of Socrates at the feet of sophistical rhetoric. In stark contrast to the emotional rhetoric and poetry of the sophists was a rhetoric grounded in philosophy and the pursuit of knowledge or enlightenment. One of the most important contributions of Aristotle's approach was that he identified rhetoric as one of the three key elements of philosophy, along with logic and dialectic. Indeed, the first line of the Rhetoric is "Rhetoric is the counterpoint of Dialectic (1.1.1--1354:1)."11 Logic, to Aristotle, is the branch of philosophy concerned with reasoning to reach scientific certainty while dialectic and rhetoric are concerned with probability and thus are the branches of philosophy best suited to human affairs. 12 Dialectic is a tool for philosophical debate; it is a means for skilled audiences to test probable knowledge in order to learn. Rhetoric is a tool for practical debate; it is a means for persuading a general audience using probable knowledge to resolve practical issues. Dialectic and rhetoric together create a partnership for a system of persuasion based on knowledge instead of manipulation of emotion. 13

English translation

Most English readers in the 20th century relied on four translations of the Rhetoric. The first, by Richard C. Jebb, was published in 1909.14 The next two translations were published in 1924. John H. Freese's translation was published as a part of the Loeb Classical Library 15 while W. Rhys Roberts' was published as a part of the Oxford University series of works in the Classics. Roberts' translation was edited and republished in 1954. 16 The 1954 edition is widely considered the most readable of these translations and is widely available online. The fourth standard translation, by Lane Cooper, came out in 1932.17

Not until the 1990s did another major translation of the Rhetoric appear. Published in 1991 and translated by George A. Kennedy, a leading classicist and rhetorician, 18 this work is notable for the precision of its translation and for its extensive commentary, notes, and references to modern scholarship on Aristotle and the Rhetoric. It is generally regarded today as the standard scholarly resource on the Rhetoric. 19

Neo-Aristotelean Theory

Rhetorical theory and criticism in the first half of the twentieth century was dominated by neo-Aristotelian criticism, the tenets of which were grounded in the Rhetoric and summed up most clearly in 1925 by Herbert Wichelns. 20 The dominance of neo-Aristotelian criticism was "virtually unchallenged until the 1960s" and even now is considered not only as one of many approaches to criticism, but as fundamental for understanding other theoretical and critical approaches as they "developed largely in response to [its] strengths and weaknesses."21

Overview Of Book I

The Rhetoric consists of three books. Book I offers a general overview, presenting the purposes of rhetoric and a working definition; it also offers a detailed discussion of the major contexts and types of rhetoric. Book II discusses in detail the three means of persuasion that an orator must rely on: those grounded in credibility (ethos), in the emotions and psychology of the audience (pathos), and in patterns of reasoning (logos). Book III introduces the elements of style (word choice, metaphor, and sentence structure) and arrangement (organization). Some attention is paid to delivery, but generally the reader is referred to the Poetics for more information in that area.22

Book One, Chapters Four - Eight: Deliberative Rhetoric

Deliberative rhetoric is the art of raising issues for discussion in political circles.
Examples of issues fit for discussion include finances, war, and laws.
Aristotle recommends avoiding deliberation on topics we, as humans, lack control over. "But the subjects of deliberation are clear, and these are whatever...are within our power. [As judges] we limit our consideration to the point of discovering what is possible or impossible for us to do." (Rhetoric,I.4.1359b:3). 23
To illustrate the depth of knowledge needed for discussion, Aristotle breaks down and delivers opinions on a variety of opinions including happiness, good, evil, justice, the distinction between the "more" and the "less", and various degrees of magnitude.
Ethical Topics/Issues
There are certain points that Aristotle examines, while exploring rhetoric and discussing such topics as goodness, happiness, good luck, and reputation. These topics are applied and put to the use when evaluating ethical issues in a society, a community. When deliberating these topics it is always good to remember that there is no specific or “true definition”, but a definition that is different to all of us, while still reaching an overall understanding and agreement by the social majority ("On Rhetoric",I.4.1359b:4). Upon this premise, we notice that all ethical issues are evaluated through the amount of goodness people possess and the goodness people observe which is based on the good luck people acquire and reputation they’ve built for themselves’ due in part to good luck. Aristotle understands good luck and reputation concerning individuals or groups comes into play when discussing ethical issues. So, reputation, in a sense, is “respect from each and every person” familiar with or acquainted with the person under question("On Rhetoric",I.5.1361a:8). Good luck also plays a role in one’s reputation. Those that somehow receive or fall upon “chance” can be considered lucky, almost like winning the lottery("On Rhetoric",I.5.1362a:17).24

Book One, Chapter Nine: Epideictic Rhetoric

"In Greek epideictic means 'fit for display' and is a branch of oratory such as 'ceremonial' or 'demonstrative,' which was oriented to public occasions. Aristotle assigned 'virtue (the noble)' and 'vice (the base)' to qualify actions as praise or blameworthy."25
He also states that it is important to highlight certain traits of the subject of praise, for instance if he was "the only one or one of few" (Aristotle 81) to have accomplished something, or if he acted in a way that surpassed expectation. The goal of epideictic rhetoric should aim "to show superiority" and to "clothe the actions with greatness and beauty" (Aristotle 82). The orator must be a "good man," but is allowed to exaggerate the truth, when deemed necessary. This is justifiable for epideictic, such as a funeral eulogy; where the one being praised should be remembered in the best possible light.
How to Employ Topics of Praise and Blame (I.9.1367a:28-41)
Aristotle instructs that in creating a speech of praise or blame, one should consider your audience: What virtues would a particular audience find praiseworthy, and what would they find shameful? As Aristotle reminds the reader, "[F]or as Socrates used to say, it is not difficult to praise Athenians in Athens" (Rhetoric,I.9.1367b:30).26

Book One, Chapters Ten - Fifteen: Judicial Rhetoric

According to Aristotle, Judicial rhetoric is "all accusations in regard to wrongs done to the community or to the individual, the accused..." ("Rhetoric",1.13.1373b:7).27
Judicial rhetoric is often found in courts of law and is used to establish guilt or innocence by accusing or defending.
Aristotle divides laws into specific, or written, and common, or unwritten laws. Specific laws are those which a society has enacted for itself and are clearly defined and written onto paper. Common law is an unwritten understanding amongst a group of people with similar ideas of "fairness".
Aristotle's example of fairness "is justice that goes beyond the written law" ("Rhetoric", 1.13.1374a.13). 28
Aristotle emphasizes the importance of willingness, or intentions, of wrongdoings. A wrongdoing may be accidental with no intentions to harm. Aristotle would see this as a forgivable wrongdoing, such as making "mistakes". However, a premeditated action with intentions to harm would be more severe and less forgivable.

Notes

  1. ^ Bizzell, P. & Bruce Herzberg. (2000). The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. NY: Bedford/St. Martin's. p.3.
  2. ^ Golden, James L., Goodwin F. Berquist, William E. Coleman, Ruth Golden, & J.Michael Sproule (eds.). (2007). The rhetoric of Western thought: From the Mediterranean world to the global setting, 9th ed. Dubuque, IA (USA): p.67.
  3. ^ Gross, Alan G. & Arthur E. Walzer. (2000). Rereading Aristotle's Rhetoric. Carbondale, IL (USA): Southern Illinois University Press: p.ix. Gross & Walzer further say that "There is no comparable situation in any other discipline: No other discipline would claim that a single ancient text so usefully informs current deliberations on practice and theory."(p.x).
  4. ^ Murphy, John J. (1983). "Introduction, " Peter Ramus, Arguments in Rhetoric against Quintilian. C.Newlands (trans.), J.J.Murphy (ed.). DeKalb IL (USA): Univ. of Illinois Press.
  5. ^ Gross & Walzer,2000, p.ix.
  6. ^ Griswold, Charles. "Plato on Rhetoric and Poetry", Stanfield Encyclopedia of Philosophy, December 22, 2003.
  7. ^ Gorgias, 465a, Perseus Project.
  8. ^ Bizzell & Herzberg, 2000.
  9. ^ Corbett, 1984.
  10. ^ Garver, Eugene. "Rhetoric," Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  11. ^ W. Rhys Roberts (trans.) (1924/1954). The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Originally published Oxford, England: Clarendon Press. E-book@Adelaide (2007). University of Adelaide, South Australia. Rhetoric
  12. ^ Corbett, Edward P.J. (1984). 'Introduction' to Aristotle's Rhetoric and Poetics (trans. W. Rhys Roberts & Ingram Bywater). NY: Modern Library. p.vi-vii.
  13. ^ Corbett, 1984.
  14. ^ Jebb, Richard C. (trans.) (1909). The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Cambridge: University Press.
  15. ^ Freese, John H.(trans.) (1924). Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric. With Greek text. Cambridge: Loeb Classical Library/Harvard University Press.
  16. ^ Roberts, W.Rhys (trans). (1924). Rhetorica: The Works of Aristotle, Vol.11. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Rpt. 1954 in Aristotle, "Rhetoric" and "Poetics" (trans. Roberts & Ingram Bywater). New York: Modern Library.
  17. ^ Cooper, Lane (trans). (1932/1960). The Rhetoric of Aristotle. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  18. ^ Kennedy, George A. (trans./ed.). 1991. Aristotle 'On Rhetoric': A Theory of Civic Discourse. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  19. ^ van Noorden, Sally. "A translation of Aristotle's Rhetoric," The Classical Review, 1993, 43.2, pp. 251-252.
  20. ^ Wichelns, H. (1925/1958). 'The Literary Criticism of Oratory' in D.C.Bryant (ed.) The Rhetorical Idiom: Essays in Rhetoric, Oratory, Language, and Drama. D.C.Bryant (ed.). Rpt. Ithaca NY (USA): Cornell University Press. p.5-42.
  21. ^ Foss, Sonja J. (1989). Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice. Prospect Heights IL (USA): Waveland Press. p.71 & 75.
  22. ^ Corbett, 1984, pp.v-xxvi.
  23. ^ Aristotle. On Rhetoric Trans. by George A. Kennedy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1991.
  24. ^ Aristotle. On Rhetoric Trans. by George A. Kennedy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1991.
  25. ^ http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Branches%20of%20Oratory/Epideictic.htm
  26. ^ Aristotle. On Rhetoric Trans. by George A. Kennedy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1991.
  27. ^ Aristotle. On Rhetoric Trans. by George A. Kennedy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1991.
  28. ^ Aristotle. On Rhetoric Trans. by George A. Kennedy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1991.

Book One, Ch. 9 In Aristotle's explanation of Epideictic Rhetoric, he defines it as a speech of praise (epainos) or blame (psogos). Epideictic rhetoric is meant to help the audience understand what the differences are between honorable virtue and dishonorable virtue. He defines virtue as "an ability for doing good, the greatest virtues are necessarily those most useful to others" (Aristotle 76). Virtue: -Justice, manly courage, self control, and wisdom, just to name a few. Honorable:-Fearless, selfless, and kind. And dishonorable is the complete opposite of honorable virtue. According to Aristotle, it is the goodness of the man who is reciting this epideictic rhetoric that makes the speach praiseworthy and honorable.

See also

Further reading

  • Translation of Rhetoric by W. Rhys Roberts
  • Perseus Project Rh.1.1.1
  • Aristotle's Rhetoric entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy by Christof Rapp
  • Bizzell, P. & Bruce Herzberg. (2000). The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. NY: Bedford/St. Martin's. p.3.
  • Garver, Eugene. Aristotle's Rhetoric: An Art of Character. The University of Chicago Press, 1995.
  • Golden, James L., Goodwin F. Berquist, William E. Coleman, Ruth Golden, & J.Michael Sproule (eds.). (2007). The rhetoric of Western thought: From the Mediterranean world to the global setting, 9th ed. Dubuque, IA (USA).
  • Kennedy, George A. Aristotle, on Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. NY/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
All Right Reserved © 2007, Designed by Stylish Blog.