The paper examines the meaning of “sign inferences”. First the reader will be reminded that sign inferences were used in all philosophical schools, but the meaning of “sign inference” is different in the various schools. After examining Quintilianus’ text one can come to the conclusion that he spoke of sign inferences in terms of the Aristotelian logic. In Aristotelian logic sign inferences were used to the effect of conviction, but, from point of view of logic, they were not valid. Thus in rhetoric Aristotle intentionally admitted invalid proofs as “rhetoric arguments”.
Aristotle refers to enthymemes both in his Organon and Rhetoric. The comparison of the various passages leaves open some questions about the exact meaning of enthymemes. The problem becomes more complicated if one compares enthymemes with syllogisms described in the
. Some enthymemes seem to be identical with the
syllogisms of the
, while some others seem to be identical with the
described in the
. Our confusion is increased by Anaximenes. He tries to define the exact meaning of various kinds of rhetoric proofs, nut his text is far from being unambiguous. At any rate he creates a new system of rhetoric proofs as compared with Aristotle.
Because of the widespread use of citations in evaluation, we tend to think of them primarily as a form of colleague recognition. This interpretation neglects rhetorical factors that shape patterns of citations. After reviewing sociological theories of citation, this paper argues that we should think of citations first as rhetoric and second as reward. Some implications of this view for quantitative modeling of the citation process are drawn.
This paper will
analyze Eisenhower's policy towards Eastern Europe in general and towards
Hungary in particular from the perspective of the gaping gulf between
high-minded rhetoric and the political realities of the Cold War and the
nuclear arms race. While the Eisenhower Administration sounded the
high-faluting rhetoric of “liberation of captive peoples”from communism and
engaged in the short-lived effort to launch a “Volunteer Freedom Corps”to
undermine communism in Eastern Europe, the political reality was that uprisings
against communism were not supported in East Germany in 1953, neither in Poland
and Hungary in 1956. The Cold War regimes in Central Europe, along with the
establishment of deterrence strategy, made the cautious Eisenhower
administration not dare actively support rebellions in Eastern Europe. The
price of an escalation of conflict towards nuclear war was deemed too
dangerous; no direct interventions were launched in the Soviet sphere of
influence. The price the Eisenhower administration also had to pay was a loss
of trust among the “captive peoples”. Eisenhower's rhetoric was revealed to be
According to Hermeneutics ch. 4, the analysis of non-assertive
sentences such as wishes, commands, etc. belongs to rhetoric or poetics. They
are, however, examined neither in the Rhetoric, nor in the Poetics,
where in ch. 20 their treatment is explicitly excluded from the art of poetry
and referred to that of delivery or performance. In this paper an explanation
is given for this discrepancy, based on an interpretation of Aristotle's
rejection of Protagoras' criticism of Homer.
The Aristotelian tradition knows the dichotomy of his works into exoteric and esoteric groups. The interpretation of the two terms, however, changed in the course of time. According to the later, perhaps Hellenistic interpretation of the terms, the group of “exoteric” works included all the works which have been written in schools of rhetoric, and later ascribed to Aristotle. The well-known treatise De mundo should not be considered as a genuin work of school-philosophy, because it belongs to Pseudo-Aristotle’s works written in a school of rhetoric and ranged amond his “exoteric” works.
This paper examines the iconolographical origin of Johannes Sambucus’ emblem dedicated to Carlo Sigonio, which – according to its title – displays the difference between grammar, dialectics, rhetoric and history. I focus on the central female figure whose innocent nudity represents the truth and whose connection with the ideal historiography standing – balancing together with Dialectics and Rhetoric – on the head of the young virgin Grammar. The special relationship between History and naked truth also defines its symbolic connection with the costumes of the other two figures: Dialectics in rough working clothes and Rhetoric in her long luxury dress. Three symbolic animals also belong to the three female figures: a sphinx to Dialectics, a chimera to Rhetoric and a winged dog to History. Contextual examination of the emblem reveals the possible source of the strange winged dog symbol is Plutarch’s short story of Osiris and Isis. In addition, the paper draws attention to an ironic twist of History in connection with Carlo Sigonio that shows that its nudity is not always so innocent.
Traditionally, the place of oratory in Roman law has been approached from two points of view: its place in Roman litigation and the possible influence of rhetoric in Roman jurisprudence and its methodology.2 I would like to focus on three main aspects of these two perspectives in the context of the age of Augustus. These are: first, the influence of rhetoric in Roman jurisprudence and its methodology; second, the impact of the Augustan Lex Iulia iudiciorum privatorum, which affected the judicial procedure; and third, the effect of the so-called “Augustan Classicism”3 (concerning the debate about style in oratory) in the language employed in Roman litigation. All these aspects connect rhetoric and Roman law, here focusing on the Augustan age. To understand the discourse, it is necessary to clarify that while the term “oratory” refers to the process of giving a speech, being the theoretical frame that embodies diverse disciplines, such as the speech, the dissertation, or the conference, on the other hand, “rhetoric” must be understood as the method employed in oratory, by which the speaker tries to give the written or spoken language enough efficacy to delight, persuade or touch the audience or the reader.4 So, on one side we have the theory and on the other, the practice. These terms are going to be used in this paper depending on whether we refer to the theoretical science or the practice carried out by the diverse subjects. This paper will display the role of Augustus as an organiser, settling on practices that have been carried out before his procedural reform, and how his preference for a concrete style on rhetoric can also have been influential on the Roman procedure that was being employed at the beginning of the Empire.
In or. 25 Demosthenes compares Aristogeiton to a watchdog who, instead of defending the sheeps, attacks and tears them to pieces. This picture seems not to be common in Attic rhetoric, but is occurs in Plat. Rep. 416a, where Socrates warns about the danger that the most popular orators, in betrayal of their former task, assault the demos and eventually become tyrants. This platonic passage confers a new meaning to the Demosthenic statement and suggests the possibility that Aristogeiton aimed at tyranny. Hence the nomos, which only can control physis, protects society from the worst human vices (poneria, hybris and anaideia), and represents the most effective defence of democracy.