Argument by Comparison

IF 0.4 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY
Samuel McCormick
{"title":"Argument by Comparison","authors":"Samuel McCormick","doi":"10.1525/RH.2014.32.2.148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although much has been written about ancient rhetorical theories of example, few scholars have examined the subtypes of example contained in these ancient rhetorical theories. As a corrective to this scholarly blind spot, this article explores the lesser-known conceptual history of “comparison,” which Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian all theorize as a subtype of example. Taken together, their rhetorical theories suggest that arguments by comparison are hypothetical, contentious, indirect, interrogative, and frequently deceptive. Moreover, Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian all theorize comparison by calling attention to the persuasive artistry of Socrates, notably his use of arguments by comparison to provoke interlocutors without challenging them directly. Understanding and explaining these rhetorical theories of comparison is the primary task of this article.","PeriodicalId":44027,"journal":{"name":"RHETORICA-A JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF RHETORIC","volume":"68 1","pages":"148-164"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2014-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RHETORICA-A JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF RHETORIC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2014.32.2.148","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Although much has been written about ancient rhetorical theories of example, few scholars have examined the subtypes of example contained in these ancient rhetorical theories. As a corrective to this scholarly blind spot, this article explores the lesser-known conceptual history of “comparison,” which Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian all theorize as a subtype of example. Taken together, their rhetorical theories suggest that arguments by comparison are hypothetical, contentious, indirect, interrogative, and frequently deceptive. Moreover, Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian all theorize comparison by calling attention to the persuasive artistry of Socrates, notably his use of arguments by comparison to provoke interlocutors without challenging them directly. Understanding and explaining these rhetorical theories of comparison is the primary task of this article.
比较论证
尽管关于古代例证修辞理论的著述很多,但很少有学者对这些古代修辞理论中所包含的例证子类型进行研究。为了纠正这一学术盲点,本文探讨了鲜为人知的“比较”概念史,亚里士多德、西塞罗和昆提利安都将其作为一个子类的例子进行了理论化。总的来说,他们的修辞理论表明,通过比较得出的论点是假设性的、有争议的、间接的、疑问的,而且经常是欺骗性的。此外,亚里斯多德、西塞罗和昆提连都将比较理论化,让人们注意到苏格拉底的说服艺术,特别是他使用比较论证来激发对话者,而不直接挑战他们。理解和解释这些比较修辞理论是本文的主要任务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Language holds a dual identity: it is both an art as well as a science, with each word expressing a unique meaning. And when words are arranged with specific purpose to persuade, or to communicate ideologies, language acquires yet another facet of identity--that of rhetoric. Rhetorica, published quarterly for the International Society for the History of Rhetoric, includes articles, book reviews and bibliographies that examine the theory and practice of rhetoric in all periods and languages and their relationship with poetics, philosophy, religion and law. The official languages of the Society, and of the journal, are English, French, German, Italian, Latin, and Spanish, with articles and features corresponding.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信