§1.1.11ἐπεὶ δὲ φανερόν ἐστιν ὅτι ἡ μὲν ἔντεχνος μέθοδος περὶ τὰς πίστεις ἐστίν, ἡ δὲ πίστις ἀπόδειξίς τις (τότε γὰρ πιστεύομεν μάλιστα ὅταν ἀποδεδεῖχθαι ὑπολάβωμεν), ἔστι δʼ ἀπόδειξις ῥητορικὴ ἐνθύμημα, καὶ ἔστι τοῦτο ὡς εἰπεῖν ἁπλῶς κυριώτατον τῶν πίστεων, τὸ δʼ ἐνθύμημα συλλογισμός τις, περὶ δὲ συλλογισμοῦ ὁμοίως ἅπαντος τῆς διαλεκτικῆς ἐστιν ἰδεῖν, ἢ αὐτῆς ὅλης ἢ μέρους τινός, δῆλον ὅτι ὁ μάλιστα τοῦτο δυνάμενος θεωρεῖν, ἐκ τίνων καὶ πῶς γίνεται συλλογισμός, οὗτος καὶ ἐνθυμηματικὸς ἂν εἴη μάλιστα, προσλαβὼν περὶ ποῖά τέ ἐστι τὸ ἐνθύμημα καὶ τίνας ἔχει διαφορὰς πρὸς τοὺς λογικοὺς συλλογισμούς.
And since it is clear that the artistic method is concerned with the modes of persuasion, and persuasion is a kind of demonstration (for we believe most of all when we suppose a thing to have been demonstrated), and rhetorical demonstration is an enthymeme, and this is, to speak simply, the most authoritative of the modes of persuasion, and the enthymeme is a kind of syllogism, and to see concerning every syllogism alike is the task of dialectic, either of the whole of it or of some part of it, it is clear that he who is best able to observe this—from what things and how a syllogism comes about—would also be the most expert in the enthymeme, if he additionally grasps what subjects the enthymeme is concerned with and what differences it has compared to logical syllogisms.
τό τε γὰρ ἀληθὲς καὶ τὸ ὅμοιον τῷ ἀληθεῖ τῆς αὐτῆς ἐστι δυνάμεως ἰδεῖν, ἅμα δὲ καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι πρὸς τὸ ἀληθὲς πεφύκασιν ἱκανῶς καὶ τὰ πλείω τυγχάνουσι τῆς ἀληθείας· διὸ πρὸς τὰ ἔνδοξα στοχαστικῶς ἔχειν τοῦ ὁμοίως ἔχοντος καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειάν ἐστιν.
For to see both the true and what is similar to the true belongs to the same capacity, and at the same time, humans are by nature sufficiently disposed toward the true and for the most part happen upon the truth; therefore, to be aim at reputable opinions belongs to him who is similarly disposed toward the truth.
ὅτι μὲν οὖν τὰ ἔξω τοῦ πράγματος οἱ ἄλλοι τεχνολογοῦσι, καὶ διότι μᾶλλον ἀπονενεύκασι πρὸς τὸ δικολογεῖν, φανερόν· §1.1.12χρήσιμος δέ ἐστιν ἡ ῥητορικὴ διά τε τὸ φύσει εἶναι κρείττω τἀληθῆ καὶ τὰ δίκαια τῶν ἐναντίων, ὥστε ἐὰν μὴ κατὰ τὸ προσῆκον αἱ κρίσεις γίγνωνται, ἀνάγκη διʼ αὑτῶν ἡττᾶσθαι, τοῦτο δʼ ἐστὶν ἄξιον ἐπιτιμήσεως, ἔτι δὲ πρὸς ἐνίους οὐδʼ εἰ τὴν ἀκριβεστάτην ἔχοιμεν ἐπιστήμην, ῥᾴδιον ἀπʼ ἐκείνης πεῖσαι λέγοντας·
That, therefore, the others systematize things outside the subject, and why they have rather inclined toward forensic pleading, is clear; Rhetoric is useful because things that are true and just are by nature stronger than their opposites, so that if judgments are not made in the fitting way, they must be defeated by their own fault, and this is worthy of censure.
διδασκαλίας γάρ ἐστιν ὁ κατὰ τὴν ἐπιστήμην λόγος, τοῦτο δὲ ἀδύνατον, ἀλλʼ ἀνάγκη διὰ τῶν κοινῶν ποιεῖσθαι τὰς πίστεις καὶ τοὺς λόγους, ὥσπερ καὶ ἐν τοῖς Τοπικοῖς ἐλέγομεν περὶ τῆς πρὸς τοὺς πολλοὺς ἐντεύξεως.
Furthermore, in dealing with some people, even if we possessed the most exact knowledge, it would not be easy to persuade them by speaking from it; for speech based on knowledge belongs to instruction, but this is impossible, rather, it is necessary to make our proofs and arguments through common opinions, just as we said in the Topics concerning conference with the multitude.
ἔτι δὲ τἀναντία δεῖ δύνασθαι πείθειν, καθάπερ καὶ ἐν τοῖς συλλογισμοῖς, οὐχ ὅπως ἀμφότερα πράττωμεν (οὐ γὰρ δεῖ τὰ φαῦλα πείθειν), ἀλλʼ ἵνα μὴ λανθάνῃ πῶς ἔχει, καὶ ὅπως ἄλλου χρωμένου τοῖς λόγοις μὴ δικαίως αὐτοὶ λύειν ἔχωμεν.
Furthermore, one must be able to persuade of opposites, just as in syllogisms, not so that we may practice both (for one must not persuade of what is bad), but so that the state of the case may not escape us, and so that, if another uses arguments unjustly, we ourselves may be able to refute them.
τῶν μὲν οὖν ἄλλων τεχνῶν οὐδεμία τἀναντία συλλογίζεται, ἡ δὲ διαλεκτικὴ καὶ ἡ ῥητορικὴ μόναι τοῦτο ποιοῦσιν· ὁμοίως γάρ εἰσιν ἀμφότεραι τῶν ἐναντίων.
Now, while none of the other arts infers opposites, dialectic and rhetoric alone do this; for both are alike concerned with opposites.
τὰ μέντοι ὑποκείμενα πράγματα οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔχει, ἀλλʼ ἀεὶ τἀληθῆ καὶ τὰ βελτίω τῇ φύσει εὐσυλλογιστότερα καὶ πιθανώτερα ὡς ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν.
However, the underlying subjects are not alike, but rather, things that are true and better are by nature always more easily argued and more persuasive, to speak simply.
πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἄτοπον εἰ τῷ σώματι μὲν αἰσχρὸν μὴ δύνασθαι βοηθεῖν ἑαυτῷ, λόγῳ δʼ οὐκ αἰσχρόν· ὃ μᾶλλον ἴδιόν ἐστιν ἀνθρώπου τῆς τοῦ σώματος χρείας.
In addition to these things, it is absurd if it is a disgrace not to be able to defend oneself with the body, but not a disgrace with speech, which is more peculiar to a human being than the use of the body.
§1.1.13εἰ δʼ ὅτι μεγάλα βλάψειεν ἂν ὁ χρώμενος ἀδίκως τῇ τοιαύτῃ δυνάμει τῶν λόγων, τοῦτό γε κοινόν ἐστι κατὰ πάντων τῶν ἀγαθῶν πλὴν ἀρετῆς, καὶ μάλιστα κατὰ τῶν χρησιμωτάτων, οἷον ἰσχύος ὑγιείας πλούτου στρατηγίας· τούτοις γὰρ ἄν τις ὠφελήσειεν τὰ μέγιστα χρώμενος δικαίως καὶ βλάψειεν ἀδίκως.
But if it is argued that one who uses such power of speech unjustly might do great harm, this is common to all good things except virtue, and especially to the most useful things, such as strength, health, wealth, and military command; for with these a person might do the greatest good if using them justly, and the greatest harm if unjustly.
§1.1.14ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐκ ἔστιν οὐθενός τινος γένους ἀφωρισμένου ἡ ῥητορική, ἀλλὰ καθάπερ ἡ διαλεκτική, καὶ ὅτι χρήσιμος, φανερόν, καὶ ὅτι οὐ τὸ πεῖσαι ἔργον αὐτῆς, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἰδεῖν τὰ ὑπάρχοντα πιθανὰ περὶ ἕκαστον, καθάπερ καὶ ἐν ταῖς ἄλλαις τέχναις πάσαις (οὐδὲ γὰρ ἰατρικῆς τὸ ὑγιᾶ ποιῆσαι, ἀλλὰ μέχρι οὗ ἐνδέχεται, μέχρι τούτου προαγαγεῖν· ἔστιν γὰρ καὶ τοὺς ἀδυνάτους μεταλαβεῖν ὑγιείας ὅμως θεραπεῦσαι καλῶς)·
That, therefore, rhetoric does not belong to any single defined genus, but is just like dialectic, and that it is useful, is clear, and also that its function is not to persuade, but to see the available means of persuasion concerning each subject, just as in all other arts (for it is not the function of medicine to make a person healthy, but to bring them forward as far as is possible; for it is possible to treat well even those who are unable to recover health).
πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ὅτι τῆς αὐτῆς τό τε πιθανὸν καὶ τὸ φαινόμενον ἰδεῖν πιθανόν, ὥσπερ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς διαλεκτικῆς συλλογισμόν τε καὶ φαινόμενον συλλογισμόν·
In addition to these things, it is clear that it belongs to the same capacity to see both the persuasive and what appears to be persuasive, just as in dialectic to see both the syllogism and the apparent syllogism.
ἡ γὰρ σοφιστικὴ οὐκ ἐν τῇ δυνάμει ἀλλʼ ἐν τῇ προαιρέσει· πλὴν ἐνταῦθα μὲν ἔσται ὁ μὲν κατὰ τὴν ἐπιστήμην ὁ δὲ κατὰ τὴν προαίρεσιν ῥήτωρ, ἐκεῖ δὲ σοφιστὴς μὲν κατὰ τὴν προαίρεσιν, διαλεκτικὸς δὲ οὐ κατὰ τὴν προαίρεσιν ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὴν δύναμιν.
For sophistry consists not in the capacity but in the moral purpose; except that here, one will be a rhetorician according to science, and another according to moral purpose, while there, a sophist is so according to moral purpose, but a dialectician not according to moral purpose but according to capacity.
περὶ δὲ αὐτῆς ἤδη τῆς μεθόδου πειρώμεθα λέγειν, πῶς τε καὶ ἐκ τίνων δυνησόμεθα τυγχάνειν τῶν προκειμένων.
Now let us try to speak of the method itself, how and from what sources we shall be able to attain our proposed ends.
πάλιν οὖν οἷον ἐξ ὑπαρχῆς ὁρισάμενοι αὐτὴν τίς ἐστι, λέγωμεν τὰ λοιπά.
Starting then, as it were, anew, let us define what it is, and then speak of the rest.