Aristotle’s Rhetoric
Dialectic does not construct its syllogisms out of any haphazard materials, such as the fancies of crazy people, but out of materials that call for discussion: and rhetoric, too, draws upon the regular subjects of debate. The duty of rhetoric is to deal with such matters as we deliberate upon without arts or systems to guide us, in the hearing of persons who cannot take in at a glance a complicated argument or follow a long chain of reasoning. (183)
Aristotle establishes three modes of persuasive appeal in his Rhetoric:
Ethos – appeal to the character of the speaker as established by the rhetoric (or preceding it, though this is not desirable)
Pathos – appeal to the “frame of mind” of the audience (i.e. values, emotions, common sense, ideology, etc.)
Logos – appeal to the logic of the propositions according to reason (divine), though not established and pursued with the rigor and retarded pace of dialectic inquiry.
Dialectic & Rhetoric
/ \
/ \
Syllogism Enthymeme
/ \
/ \
/ \
Examples
|
Premises explicit and certain by definition
A) Rhetoric classes study boring texts B) This is a rhetoric class -------- \ We will study boring texts in 371
The syllogism above proceeds by agreed upon, definite premises from which a valid conclusion may be deduced. As Aristotle indicates, this form of reasoning is time consuming because each premise must be established and each conclusion must be arrived at in disciplined fashion, hence the length of Socratic dialogues. Presumably, the syllogism relies on universal reason and so is not group-based or value-based persuasion.
|
Some premises left out and arguable; audience supplies the missing part
People should say what they want because this is America
The enthymeme above relies on what Aristotle calls “common places” or assumptions held in the mind of the public to win agreement. What is left out is the middle term, that America was founded upon the freedom of speech. Enthymemes will often lead with a conclusion and then attempt a reduced justification for it. This is why Aristotle indicates they are appropriate as shorthand arguments for persuading various groups with values in common.
|