Cannon Midterm

8/8/2019 Cannon Midterm

1/7

Aristotles Rhetoric 1

Aristotles Rhetoric and its Influence on Modern American Politics

Tyler Cannon

English 143 Studies in Rhetorical Theory

Dr. Haydel

May 25, 2010


2/7


Aristotles contributions to the world can be seen as endless, as he brought forth

ideas that sparked more ideas, as well as from other people and thinkers of his time and

time thereafter, to the point where seemingly most of western thought and philosophy has

been spawned from him alone. The idea and art of rhetoric was touched by Aristotle as

well, and though he was not the first person to coin the idea he did have his way of

explaining and interpreting it in a way that was never seen nor heard before. Spawning

from his ideas of this new interpretation of rhetoric came a seemingly new judiciary

process of political oratory, developed by Aristotle from his findings on the human

psyche, as well as social influences. By demonstrating Aristotles definition of rhetoric

and his interpretation of its components, understanding the judiciary process in Ancient

Greece, and using these brief understandings to compare with our modern judicial

process we will be able to see how much Aristotle has influenced our present-day

political operation.

Aristotle defines rhetoric as an ability, in each particular case, to see the

available means of persuasion (Kennedy, 2007, p. 37). He goes further to call rhetoric

an art, and that it is an art of persuasion in and of itself, and that no other action that

is considered an art (i.e. medicine, gymnastics, woodworking, director, etc.) persuades

about anything else besides its own subject matter. The beautification of words, phrases,

ideas, and taking this prose and being able to emotionally move and persuade a person or

a large group of people is precisely the subject of rhetoric. There are three artistic proofs

in which Aristotles brought forth to support claim that rhetoric is indeed a true art form.

These artistic proofs are called logos, or logical reasoning; pathos, or human

emotions and their causes; and ethos, which discusses human character and decency


3/7


(Herrick, 2009, p. 87). Logical reasoning has to do with intellect. Being able to reason

using words and phrases, and introducing these reasonings into a discourse is precisely

what logos stands for. This idea is till used today in our political process. Politicians and

lawyers use logic to get their points across to the public or the jury. Forming arguments

based on evidence is a form of reasoning. Pathos (having to do with the human psyche) is

a type of study of human emotion. Aristotle described pathos as putting the audience in

the right frame of mind (Herrick, 2009, p. 88). Being able to formulate a logical

argument means nothing if one is not able to understand human emotion and how to

convey that logic to each and every person. Aristotles clear understanding of human

emotion enabled him to demonstrate the importance of formulating a discourse to the

parameters of a certain audience. This is still used today, demonstrated in politics. When

a politician or lawyer wants to speak about a person or law, they cannot use the same way

to present the argument in all environments. They must speed up their words, add

emphasis to others, and control the dynamics of the volume. When criminal defense

lawyers are speaking to a jury about how their client is innocent of killing a man they

must make the jury feel sympathetic. This is the proof of pathos. Ethos deals with the

credibility of the speaker (Herrick). This credibility is not based on prior reputation of the

speaker, but the worth of his words. The speaker needs to be trusted by the audience for

the audience to buy into what he is saying. Aristotle claimed that of the three artistic

proofs, ethos was potentially the most persuasive (Herrick, 2009, p. 90). Also in the

modern political sense, the constituency of a politician wants to be convinced of his

genuine beliefs. What he says and what he does is always under scrutiny. If he speaks one

time he must sound knowledgeable and seem convincing. The initial definition of


4/7


rhetoric and the discussion of the artistic proofs provide the very basis of understanding

on how rhetoric has shaped our modern political culture. What about the settings where

Aristotles rhetoric and the artistic proofs were used?

Three different settings were described as diverse types of oratory. The first was

called symbouleutikon or deliberative oratory (Herrick, 2009, 85). This category of

rhetoric was used to create rules and regulations and debate about things that would help

the people of a city. It was used to make recommendations about what would make the

city better, similar to a type of consultant. Deliberative oratory discusses events that may

happen in the future. This ties in with modern day politics easily. Presidents have

advisors who help the President make decisions about large events. They are always

looking for and comparing trends in order to discover what the best decision for the

future might be. Epideiktikon is another type of rhetorical purpose. These were

speeches made at funerals or after a great battle (Herrick, p. 85). This was concerned with

issues of the past, observing and reflecting on what happened. This type did not require

the people to perform an action, but only to think and reflect. In modern politics we use

past speeches and past happenings to look back on and learn. We often think about the

past and use it to inspire us to do more. The last specie of rhetorical purpose is

dikanikon. Probably most tied to our judicial system today, this judicial type of

rhetorical purpose deal with judgment (Herrick, p. 86). Making decisions from what

happened in the past, looking at what happened in the when and deciding what to do with

it is the nature of the category. In and outside of the courts this is used to figure out what

happened in the past in order to gain understanding. It judges based on a set of found

facts. These species of rhetoric provide even more insight into the nature of rhetoric and


5/7


our modern politics. These ideas from Aristotle were able to produce a part of law that

we use still this day, natural law.

Speaking in the sense of politics in terms of law and the study of judiciary

procedures, Aristotle brought in a point in his Rhetoric text. He states that right and

wrong have to be looked at from two different types of law, specific law and

common or natural law (Kennedy, 2007, p. 97). Specific law deals with a written rule

or piece of legislation written which is subsequently broken. Natural law deals with laws

that are innate inside of our beings, not necessarily written, that are subsequently broken.

Our judicial system in the United States of America is based off of these two types of

law. American law was originally adapted from English law that practiced a common

law-type system during the time of the Revolutionary War (Hughes, 1996, p. 12). The

Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson talks of our natural rights:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are

endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,

Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. These words echo the words written by Aristotle

almost three thousand years earlier.

Our American political system is highly developed from Aristotles translation

and interpretation of rhetoric. Seeing how persuasion was a being misused by many

rhetoricians at the time his excellence in thought helped to redefine the genre and create

new ideologies and a new way of thought. The uses of the artistic proofs are still evident

in not just US politics, but politics around the world. The species of rhetoric and their

type of judge (or no judge at all) is still used in the rings of oratory in our times. In many

ways the political area of Ancient Greece is similar to that of modern America, that of


6/7


there being a war of words throughout the land has always been prevalent. Without

Aristotles Rhetoric we would not be politically where we are to this day.


7/7


References

- Herrick, J. A. (2009). The history and theory of rhetoric: An Introduction.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

- Hughes, G. (1996). "Common Law Systems," in Fundamentals ofamerican law.New York: Oxford University Press.

- Kennedy, G. A. (2007). On rhetoric: A history of civil discourse. NewYork: Oxford University Press.

Documents

Cannon Midterm