Reference address : https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/ancient-greece/aristotle/rhetoric-b.asp?pg=43

ELPENOR - Home of the Greek Word

Three Millennia of Greek Literature
ARISTOTLE HOME PAGE  /  ARISTOTLE WORKS  /  SEARCH ARISTOTLE WORKS  

Aristotle, Second Part of the RHETORIC Complete

Translated by W. Roberts.

Aristotle Bilingual Anthology  Studies  Aristotle in Print

ELPENOR EDITIONS IN PRINT

The Original Greek New Testament
II: 43 pages - You are on Page 43

(2) The facts having been proved, the natural thing to do next is to magnify or minimize their importance. The facts must be admitted before you can discuss how important they are; just as the body cannot grow except from something already present. The proper lines of argument to be used for this purpose of amplification and depreciation have already been set forth.

(3) Next, when the facts and their importance are clearly understood, you must excite your hearers' emotions. These emotions are pity, indignation, anger, hatred, envy, emulation, pugnacity. The lines of argument to be used for these purposes also have been previously mentioned.

(4) Finally you have to review what you have already said. Here you may properly do what some wrongly recommend doing in the introduction-repeat your points frequently so as to make them easily understood. What you should do in your introduction is to state your subject, in order that the point to be judged may be quite plain; in the epilogue you should summarize the arguments by which your case has been proved. The first step in this reviewing process is to observe that you have done what you undertook to do. You must, then, state what you have said and why you have said it. Your method may be a comparison of your own case with that of your opponent; and you may compare either the ways you have both handled the same point or make your comparison less direct: 'My opponent said so-and-so on this point; I said so-and-so, and this is why I said it'. Or with modest irony, e.g. 'He certainly said so-and-so, but I said so-and-so'. Or 'How vain he would have been if he had proved all this instead of that!' Or put it in the form of a question. 'What has not been proved by me?' or 'What has my opponent proved?' You may proceed then, either in this way by setting point against point, or by following the natural order of the arguments as spoken, first giving your own, and then separately, if you wish, those of your opponent.

For the conclusion, the disconnected style of language is appropriate, and will mark the difference between the oration and the peroration. 'I have done. You have heard me. The facts are before you. I ask for your judgement.'


The End

Previous Page ||| First Page of the RHETORIC
Aristotle Home Page ||| Search Aristotle's works

Plato ||| Other Greek Philosophers ||| Elpenor's Free Greek Lessons

Development of Greek Philosophy ||| History of Greek Philosophy ||| History of Ancient Greece
Three Millennia of Greek Literature

 

Greek Literature - Ancient, Medieval, Modern

  Aristotle Complete Works   Aristotle Home Page & Bilingual Anthology
Aristotle in Print

Elpenor's Greek Forum : Post a question / Start a discussion

Learned Freeware

Reference address : https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/ancient-greece/aristotle/rhetoric-b.asp?pg=43