Aristotle's Rhetoric

We are set in a small, hole in the wall bar in classical Athens fittingly named “doxa”. Favored by philosophers and sophists alike as a forum for discussion and debate, it is not uncommon for famous figures like Isocrates or Aristotle to run into one another. Tonight it happens that Aristotle runs into his mentor and colleague Plato and the two of them start discussing the controversial topic of rhetoric , when Gorgias - a few drinks deep and never shy of an argument - decides to walk over and weigh in on the matter.

.

.

.

Gorgias: “Hesperos, a round of zythos(beer) for me and my compatriots please

Hesperos: Sure thing Gorgias, coming right up.

Plato: “Gorgias, I am most surprised to see you here instead of in the courthouse getting some criminal

I was just telling Plato about my new work on rhetoric. Among other things I have come up with a new definition which I believe captures the essence of rhetoric: “Rhetoric is the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion.” I have sythnesized the whole of rhetoric down into only three different oratory forms:

First we have political or deliberative oratory which concerns itself with the laws and future of the city state and, in extension, the happiness of the citizens. Second, we have the forensic or judicial oratory, which is the type of speaking you concern yourself with in “The Encomium of Helen” Gorgias. This form is used to reconstruct the past and the forensic orator, who has to be a good observer of human character, must be able to stand in front of a jury and argue for or against evidence and be able to convince them. Finally, we have ceremonial or epideictic oratory as a means of delivering rhetoric concerned with virtue and vice, and the present values of our city state. I personally enjoy deliberative oratory the most as I feel the future affects the most people and has the biggest impact.

What does rhetoric achieve? Most often rhetoric is used by people like Gorgias and his Sophists to persuade others and achieve ones own goals. There is a difference between episteme, which I define as true knowledge, and pistis, which is mere belief. Once an orator incorporates episteme into his rhetoric I can concede that rhetoric becomes an art, however I still see it as a lesser art.”

Cicero: “I believe our difference in view stems from the fact that we hold orators to a different standard. To me, being an orator is a way of life. You need natural ability, a lot of practice and to be persuasive you need a lot of knowledge in a variety of different subjects.”

Aristotle: “Personally I divide the arts up into different categories. Some arts benefit society like the art of medicine, other arts are more practical. It is to those that I sort rhetoric, for being able to persuade is a skill useful in a plethora of different situations.”

Gorgias: “I believe we can all agree that true rhetoric requires knowledge. What else do you feel is important for rhetoric