Aristotle’s enthymeme: syllogisms or creative processes?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v14i53.169Keywords:
enthymeme, Aristotle, discursive process, coherence, toposAbstract
The Enthymeme, which is a central concept in Aristotle’s rhetoric, is also one of his most debated notions. A majority of the interpretations proceed from Aristotle’s own words “the enthymeme is a kind of syllogism” and most of them understand the enthymeme as a reduced syllogism or a syllogism based on the plausible. In this article different views of the Aristotelian enthymeme are examined, and an alternative outlook inspired by Aristotle’s own examples, is put forward. This is a suggestion that takes into consideration the context dependence, the dialogical nature and the need for presence (in a Perelmanian sense), in human communication and construction of meaning. The enthymeme is here viewed as a discursive process in which the reasoning of the speaker connects with the listener’s structures of meaning. An important phenomenon in this process is the establishment of coherence.
References
Ad Herennium: de ratione dicendi ad C. Herennium. Retorikförlaget, Åstorp: 2009.
Anaximenes. Rhetorica ad Alexandrum. London: 1937.
Aristoteles. Den nikomachiska etiken. Daidalos, Göteborg: 1988.
Aristoteles. On Rhetoric. Loeb, Harvard University Press, London: 1994.
Aristoteles. Retorik. Museum Tusculanums Forlag, København: 1991.
Aristoteles. The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: 1960.
Aristotle. The Categories; On Interpretation; Prior Analytics. Harvard University Press London: 1983.
Aristotle. On Rhetoric: a Theory of Civic Discourse. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1991.
Aristotle. Posterior Analytics. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1997.
Aristotle. Prior Analytics. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oseo/instance.00262103
Aristotle. The Rhetoric of Aristotle: with a Commentary. University Press, Cambridge: 1877.
Arnauld, Antoine och Pierre Nicole. Logic, or The Art of Thinking. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166768
Baldwin, Charles Sears. Ancient Rhetoric and Poetic. The Macmillan company, New York: 1924.
Billig, Michael. Arguing and Thinking: a Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1996.
Bitzer, Lloyd. ”Aristotle’s Enthymeme Revisited.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 45 (1959). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335635909382374
Black, Max. Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.: 1962. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501741326
Booth, Wayne C. Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent. Chicago University Press, Chicago: 1974.
Braet, Antoine C. ”Ethos, Pathos and Logos in Aristotle’s ‘Rhetoric’: A Re-examination.” Argumentation 6 (1992). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154696
Brinton, Alan. ”Pathos and the ‘Appeal to Emotion’: An Aristotelian Analysis.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 5 (1988).
Catana, Leo. Vico and Literary Mannerism : a Study in the Early Vico and his Idea of Rhetoric and Ingenuity. Peter Lang, New York: 1999.
Cicero, Marcus Tullius. On the Ideal Orator (De oratore). Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780195091984.book.1
Conley, Thomas. ”The Enthymeme in Perspective.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 70 (1984). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638409383687
Conley, Thomas. ”’Logical Hylomorphism’ and Aristole’s Koinoi Topoi.” Central States Speech Journal 29 (1978). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10510977809367962
Cronkhite, Gary. ”The Enthymeme as Deductive Rhetorical Argument.” Western Speech nr. 30 (1966).
De Quincey, Thomas. ”Rhetoric”, i: The Collected Writings of Thomas De Quincey. Edinburgh: 1890.
Eemeren, Frans van, och Piet Houtlosser. ”Strategic Maneuvering: A Synthetic Recapitulation.” Argumentation 20 (2006). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-007-9037-z
Eemeren, Frans van, Tjark Kruiger, och Rob Grootendorst. Handbook of Argumentation Theory: a Critical Survey of Classical Backgrounds and Modern Studies. Foris, Dordrecht: 1987. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110846096
Ehninger, Douglas, och Wayne Brockriede. Decision by Debate. Dodd, Mead and Co, New York: 1978.
Fahnestock, Jeanne. ”Aristotle and Theories of Figuration”, i: Gross and Walzer (red), Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 2000.
Fahnestock, Jeanne. Rhetorical Figures in Science. Oxford University Press, New York: 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195117509.001.0001
Farrell, Thomas. ”Aristotle’s Enthymeme as Tacit Reference”, i: Gross and Walzer (red), Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 2000.
Fisher, Walter. ”Uses of the Enthymeme.” Speech Teacher, nr. 13 (1964). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03634526409377370
Gaines, Robert. ”The Contemporary Art of Practical Discourse”, i: Gross and Walzer (red), Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 2000.
Garver, Eugene. Aristotle’s Rhetoric: an Art of Character. University of Chicago Press, Chicago; London: 1994.
Grassi, Ernesto. Rhetoric as Philosophy: the Humanist Tradition. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 2001.
Grimaldi, William. ”Studies in the Philosophy of Aristotle s Rhetoric.” Hermes 25 (1972).
Gross, Alan G. The Rhetoric of Science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass: 1990.
Hellspong, Lennart. Konsten att tala: handbok i praktisk retorik. Studentlitteratur, Lund: 2004.
Holmberg, Carl. ”Dialectical Rhetoric and Rhetorical Rhetoric.” Philosophy and Rhetoric, nr. 10 (1977).
Ijsseling, Samuel. Rhetoric and Philosophy in Conflict: an Historical Survey. M. Nijhoff, The Hague: 1976. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1037-5
Isokrates. Isocrates: in three volumes. 2. Harvard University Press, London, Cambridge: 1929.
Jackson, Sally, och Scott Jacobs. ”Structure of Conversational Argument: Pragmatic Bases for the Enthymeme.” Quarterly Journal of Speech, nr. 66 (1980). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638009383524
Johnstone, Christopher Lyle. ”An Aristotelian Trilogy: Ethics, Rhetoric, Politics, and the Search for Moral Truth.” Philosophy of Rhetoric, nr. 20 (1980).
Kennedy, George Alexander. Aristotle: On Rhetoric: a Theory of Civic Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Kuhn, Thomas. De vetenskapliga revolutionernas struktur. Thales, Stockholm: 1997.
Lakoff, George, och Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live by. University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001
Lanham, Richard. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms: a Guide for Students of English Literature. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles: 1991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520912045
Lanigan, Richard. ”Enthymeme: The Rhetorical Species of Aristotle’s Syllogism.” Southern Speech Communication Journal, nr. 39 (1973). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10417947409372230
Lund Klujeff, Marie. ”Retoriske figurer og stil som argumentation.” Rhetorica Scandinavica 45 (2008). DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/ZXKT8229
Lunsford, Andrea, och Lisa Ede. ”On Distinctions Between Classical and Modern Rhetoric”, i: Connors, Ede and Lundsford (red) Essays on Classical Rhetoric and Modern Discourse. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale: 1984.
Madden, Edward H. ”Aristotle’s Treatment of Probability and Signs.” Philosophy of Science 24, nr. 2 (1957) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/287530
McBurney, James Howard. ”The Place of the Enthymeme in Rhetorical Theory”, Speech Monographs nr. 3 (1936) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03637753609374841
McCloskey, Deirdre. The Rhetoric of Economics. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wis.: 1998.
Miller, Arthur, och John Bee. ”Enthymemes: Body and Soul” Philosophy and Rhetoric nr. 5:4 (1972)
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Samlade skrifter, band 2. Otidsenliga betraktelser I-IV / Efterlämnade skrifter 1872-1875. Symposion, Eslöv: 2005.
Nussbaum, Martha Craven. Känslans skärpa, tankens inlevelse: essäer om etik och politik. Symposion, Stockholm: 1995.
Perelman, Chaim. Retorikens imperium: retorik och argumentation. Brutus Östlings bokförl. Symposion, Eslöv: 2004.
Perelman, Chaim, och Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric: Treatise on Argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame: 1969.
Piaget, Jean. Språk och tanke hos barnet. Liber Förlag, Malmö: 1984.
Quandahl, Ellen. ”Aristotle s Rhetoric: Reinterpreting Invention.” Rhetoric Review, nr. 4 (1986). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198609359115
Quintilian. The Institutio Oratoria. Harvard University Press; W. Heinemann, Cambridge, Mass, London: 1920.
Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius. Den fulländade talaren. Wahlström & Widstrand, Stockholm: 2002.
Selander, Staffan, Lennart Hellspong, och Maria Wolrath Söderberg. ”Final Report for the Project Rhetoric in Teacher Training for Scientific and Technical Professions (116/G03).” NSHU www.nshu.se/download/4728/116g03slutrapportselander.pdf.
Sigrell, Anders. Att övertyga mellan raderna: en retorisk studie om underförståddheter i modern politisk argumentation. Rhetor förlag, Åstorp: 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/XUUY4379
Tindale, Christopher. Acts of Arguing: A Rhetorical Model of Argument. State University of New York Press: 1999.
Walker, Jeffrey. ”The Body of Persuasion: A Theory of the Enthymeme.” College English, nr. 56 (1994). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/378216
Walton, Douglas och Fabrizio Macagno. “Enthymemes, Argumentation Schemes and Topics” Logique & Analyse 205 (2009). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034
Van Eemeren, Frans, och Rob Grootendorst. Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale: 1992.
Wheelwright, Philip Ellis. Metaphor & Reality. Indiana University Press, Bloomington: 1975.
Vico, Giambattista. On the Study Methods of Our Time. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.: 1990. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501732591
Wolrath Söderberg, Maria. ”En metaforisk didaktik”, i: Geer and Malmbjer (red), Språk på tvärs. Stockholm: 2004.
Wolrath Söderberg, Maria. Finns det genvägar till klokhet? Retorik som konsten att överväga. Studentlitteratur, Lund: 2003.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Rhetorica Scandinavica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Open Access; CC Erkännande-IckeKommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0
