Aristotle (Ἀριστοτέλης in Greek), 384–322 BC, was a philosopher during the Classical period in
 |
| Aristotle (the one in blue with his right hand holding down and left hand holding his book on ethics) together with his teacher Plato in red in the painting entitled School of Athens by Raphael at the Raphael Room in Vatican |
Ancient Greece. He is greatly influential in many aspects and considered the "Father of Western Philosophy" together with his teacher Plato. Among's his wide range of philosophical studies, one area of practical philosophy deals with rhetoric, a theory to explain the power of persuasion. In putting forward rhetoric arguments, he applies the doctrines of sullogismos which forms the basis of dialetic (辨證法), logic and the theory of demonstration. He also developes concepts of emotion, later furtehr developed in his ethics, and informs cognitive features of language and style.
"Sullogismos, a Greek word, is a noun derived from the verb sullogizesthai—revealingly rendered ‘syllogize’—and meaning the result of the action denoted. Thus, ‘syllogization’, connoting activity, would be more faithful than ‘syllogism’, an English noun devoid of connotation of activity." "Sullogizesthai combines sul (together) and logizesthai (reckon, compute) and that sullogizesthai had been used in Greek mathematics for “calculate”. It had been used by Plato in connection with deducing conclusions in arguments, a sense very close to those found in Aristotle."
- Corcoran J & Tracy K. Interpreting Aristotle’s definition of sullogismos. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic. 23 (2017) 132. accessed https://www.academia.edu/35723081/Interpreting_Aristotle_s_definition_of_sullogismos?auto=download
The Two Tripartites of Rhetoric
Aristotle's work on rhetoric is highlighted in his two tripartite divisions. The first one distinguishes three means of persuasion: either through the character of the speaker (ethos), the emotional state of the listener (pathos), or the argument (logos) itself. The second tripartite refers to the three species of public speech: judicial, deliberative and demonstrative species.
- in the deliberative species, the speaker either advises the audience to do something or warns against doing something and hence the audience needs to judge things that may happen in the future may be good or bad, as well as the respective consequences;
- the judicial species refers to a speech occurring the court; the speaker may be making an accusation or a defensive argument and naturally treats things that happened in the past. The audience is to judge whether the event occurred was just or unjust, or according to or contrary to the law.
- the ceremonial or the epideictic speech praises or blames somebody and aims at describing things or deeds of the person concerned as honorable or shameful; the context is usually less controversial and the audience may not be required to take sides either in favor of one of two opposing parties.
Aristotle considered the rhetorics a useful tool when one needs to convey a good and true idea to a large crowd, who may be ordinary audience with difficulties in grasping exact science despite good proof available. It may be controversial though.
Enthymeme (ενθυμήματα)
There are two more concepts we would like to examine here. The first one is enthymeme.
Aristotle defines an enthymeme (from "enthumeisthai", meaning "to consider") as a rhetorical technique with the function of a proof or demonstration in the context of public speech. Since a demonstration is a kind of sullogismos and the enthymeme is also a sullogismos. And Aristotle also defines enthymeme as a form of deductive argument, which is in turn characterized by a premises-to-conclusion structure such that the conclusion is guaranteed by the premises alone. The minimal requirement of enthymeme therefore also includes a statement as some form of a reason to the given statement except that the premises is often given in a conditional ‘if’-clause or a causal ‘since’- or ‘for’-clause.
"Aristotle stresses that the sentence “There is no man among us who is free” taken for itself is a maxim, but becomes an enthymeme as soon as it is used together with a reason such as “for all are slaves of money or of chance (and no slave of money or chance is free).” Sometimes the required reason may even be implicit, as e.g. in the sentence “As a mortal, do not cherish immortal anger” the reason why one should not cherish mortal anger is implicitly given in the phrase “immortal,” which alludes to the rule that is not appropriate for mortal beings to have such an attitude."
Aristotle calls the enthymeme the “body of persuasion” since the people are most readily persuaded when they think that something has been demonstrated. The construction of enthymemes is basically a deduction from the accepted opinions (endoxa), or if not commonly accepted by the audience, one that can be derived from commonly accepted opinions.
Enthymemes is essentially brief and usually contains fewer premises. They might be built on premises which is accepted because the speaker is credible. They may also be built on may also be built on premises which is accepted because the speaker is considered credible, probable (eikos) premises, or from signs (sêmeia).
As for deductive arguments, there could be a real and apparent (or fallacious) deductions, enthymemes can also be real or apparent or fallacious. The fallacious enthymeme pretends to include a valid deduction, while it actually rests on a fallacious inference. In that case, the inference, though not necessarily valid, might be accepted a good and informative argument.
Styles and Metaphors
The other concept is style, or lexis.
Aristotle reckons that good prose style may have an impact on the degree of clarity which is essential for comprehensibility as well as persuasiveness in turn. A well formulated argument with clear linguistic expression might become banal and failed to attract the audience. Dignified or elevated expressions(ornament), or any formulations that deviate from common usage might be useful. Appropriate use of uncommon vocabulary might make the audience curious but an excessive use may lose the its clarity and becomes inappropriate arousing suspicion. (note 1) On the issue of style, Aristotle also introduces the concept of metaphors and considers it a form of enthymeme as well as a useful way to give a good style. He considers similes a form of metaphors in that, while in the metaphor something is identified or substituted, the simile compares two things with each other, using words as “like” or “as” etc. In addition to the ornamental function, Aristotle stresses the cognitive function of metaphors and considers it bringing out learning. The hearer has to find something common between the metaphor and the thing the metaphor refers to. A metaphor not only refers to a thing, but simultaneously describes the thing in a certain respect.
Note 1: Though Aristotle tends to regard one good style consisting of the three elements of clarity, ornamental, and appropriateness, from the times of Cicero and Quintilianus on, these three, along with the correctness of Greek or Latin, became the canonical four virtues of speech (virtutes dicendi). These four might be looked for while one is reading through the spectacles of the Roman art of rhetoric.
Ref:
- Rapp, Christof, "Aristotle's Rhetoric", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2010/entries/aristotle-rhetoric/>.
- "Aristotle", Wikipedia. Accessed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#Rhetoric_and_poetics.
- Corcoran J & Tracy K. Interpreting Aristotle’s definition of sullogismos. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic. 23 (2017) 132. accessed https://www.academia.edu/35723081/Interpreting_Aristotle_s_definition_of_sullogismos?auto=download
