Chapter 4
Aristotle on Rhetoric
Chapter Overview
Aristotle set out to present a systematic treatment of the art of rhetoric. His discussion of rhetoric remains one of the most complete and insightful ever penned, and certainly the most influential. Rhetoric was, for Aristotle, “the faculty of discovering the available means of persuasion in any setting.” It was not limited to one class of subjects, reasoned to probable conclusions, and could be deployed to develop arguments on either side of an issue. Rhetoric adapted messages to large audiences made up of people who lacked special training in reasoning. Moreover, rhetoric addressed questions of public significance that engaged the community’s most important values, such as those regarding happiness, virtue, and justice. Aristotle’s treatment of rhetoric still provides the foundation for much instruction in both speaking and writing.
Review Questions
Tap to reveal the author’s responses when you’re ready to check your answers.
Plato saw rhetoric as the methods of persuasive language used by the Sophists. He did not believe it was a true art, and he was concerned that in the hands of unjust people rhetoric was a dangerous tool. Aristotle disagrees, firstly, by saying it is a true art and can therefore be systematically studied. Rhetoric is more than just persuasive speech; it is a systematic study of arguments and appeals. Rhetoric was an art of investigation and expression.
Some of the similarities between rhetoric and dialectic are:
- They both begin with endoxa.
- They both deal with questions that do not belong to a specific science or art.
- They both can argue either side of a case.
- They both deal with questions that concern everyone.
Some of the differences between rhetoric and dialectic are:
- Rhetoric addresses larger groups while dialectic addresses small groups of experts.
- Rhetoric is delivered in the form of a speech while dialectic is a process of questions and answers.
- Rhetoric deals with specific questions while dialectic deals with general questions.
- Rhetoric uses logos, pathos, and ethos, while dialectic employs only arguments.
Rhetoric’s fundamental component is the enthymeme while dialectic’s fundamental component is the formal syllogism.
Aristotle gives several reasons for why rhetoric is a useful art:
- While there is a natural tendency for the truth to prevail, in public settings it often requires the advocacy of capable speakers and writers.
- Rhetoric adapts complex ideas to ordinary audiences.
- Rhetoric allows one to argue both sides of a case.
- Rhetoric is verbal self-defense
When addressing whether rhetoric is a techne, these artistic proofs represent what the art of rhetoric studies. The three artistic proofs that are the proper study of rhetoric as a techne are logos, pathos, and ethos.
Epideictic oratory was employed at public ceremonies such as funerals or commemorations of war heroes. According to Walker, epideictic discourse shaped and reinforced public values.
Quiz
Put your Chapter 4 knowledge to the test!
Flashcards
Think you know the term? Click to check!
Essay Questions
- In Gorgias, Plato argues that rhetoric is a knack, and not a techne or true art. In Rhetoric, Aristotle argues that rhetoric is a techne. Explain why Aristotle takes this position. If rhetoric is a true art, what does the art allow one to accomplish, and about what sorts of things does it instruct one?
- Aristotle claimed that the art of rhetoric was built on a type of argument he termed the enthymeme. He also held that rhetoric involved the study of three artistic proofs, and that rhetoric could be divided into three general categories according to the settings in which it occurred and the issues that it addressed. Explain Aristotle’s understanding of the enthymeme. What distinguishes an enthymeme from other sorts of arguments, such as the syllogism of dialectic? Identify and briefly describe Aristotle’s three artistic proofs. What are the various types of settings, and the kinds of issues with which each deals?
Weblinks
Dive deeper with hand-picked online resources
A look at Plato’s Academy today
Demonstration of deliberative oratory in Obama’s “A More Perfect Union” Speech
Demonstration of epideictic oratory in Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech
Demonstration of forensic oratory in Rep. Schiff’s closing argument in Donald Trump’s first impeachment trial
Recommended Readings
Want to learn more? Check out these bonus readings!
Aristotle, Rhetoric. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. New York: Modern Library, 1954.
Aristotle on Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Trans. and Ed. George Kennedy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Aristotle: The Classical Heritage of Rhetoric. Ed. Keith V. Erickson. Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press, 1974.
Larry Arnhart. Aristotle on Political Reasoning. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 1981.
Lloyd F. Bitzer. “Aristotle’s Enthymeme Revisited.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 45 (1959): 399–408.
Barry Brummett, Reading Rhetorical Theory (Harcourt College Publishers, Fort Worth, TX: 2000), 26.
The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle. Ed. Jonathan Barnes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Thomas M. Conley. “‘Logical Hylomorphism’ and Aristotle’s Koinoi Topoi.” Central States Speech Journal 29 (Summer, 1978): 92–97.
W. W. Fortenbaugh. Aristotle on Emotion. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1975.
James L. Golden, Goodwin F. Berquist, William E. Coleman, and J. Michael Sproule. The Rhetoric of Western Thought: From the Mediterranean World to the Global Setting. 8th ed. (Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt, 2004), 65; 77.
William Grimaldi. Aristotle, Rhetoric I: A Commentary. New York: Fordham University Press, 1980.
Ekaterina Haskins. Logos and Power in Isocrates and Aristotle. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2004.
Gerard A. Hauser. “The Example in Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Bifurcation or Contradiction?” Philosophy and Rhetoric 1 (1968): 78–90.
Donovan J. Ochs. “Aristotle’s Concept of Formal Topics”. Speech Monographs 36 (1969): 419–425.
Peripatetic Rhetoric After Aristotle. Ed. W. W. Fortenbaugh and D. C. Mirhady. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1994.