Humanitext Reader

Aristotle · Rhetoric §1.2.19-1.2.22

The Nature of Example and Common versus Specific Topics

Passage 6 of 98 · Greek

Summary

Aristotle explains that the 'example' is a 'part-to-part' inference moving from one similar particular to another, and discusses the fundamental distinction among enthymemes between 'common places' (applicable to multiple fields) and 'specific places' (restricted to individual sciences).

§1.2.19παράδειγμα δὲ ὅτι μέν ἐστιν ἐπαγωγὴ καὶ περὶ ποῖα ἐπαγωγή, εἴρηται·
As for the example, that it is an induction and with what kind of things induction is concerned, has been stated.
ἔστι δὲ οὔτε ὡς μέρος πρὸς ὅλον οὔθʼ ὡς ὅλον πρὸς μέρος οὔθʼ ὡς ὅλον πρὸς ὅλον, ἀλλʼ ὡς μέρος πρὸς μέρος, ὅμοιον πρὸς ὅμοιον—ὅταν ἄμφω μὲν ᾖ ὑπὸ τὸ αὐτὸ γένος, γνωριμώτερον δὲ θάτερον ᾖ θατέρου, παράδειγμά ἐστιν· οἷον ὅτι ἐπεβούλευε τυραννίδι Διονύσιος αἰτῶν τὴν φυλακήν· καὶ γὰρ Πεισίστρατος πρότερον ἐπιβουλεύων ᾔτει φυλακὴν καὶ λαβὼν ἐτυράννησε, καὶ Θεαγένης ἐν Μεγάροις· καὶ ἄλλοι ὅσους ἴσασι, παράδειγμα πάντες γίγνονται τοῦ Διονυσίου, ὃν οὐκ ἴσασίν πω εἰ διὰ τοῦτο αἰτεῖ.
And it is related neither as part to whole, nor as whole to part, nor as whole to whole, but as part to part, like to like—whenever both are under the same genus, but one is better known than the other, it is an example; for instance, [to show] that Dionysius was plotting for a tyranny when he asked for a guard; for Peisistratus also previously plotted and asked for a guard, and having obtained it, became a tyrant, and Theagenes in Megara did the same; and all others whom people know become examples of Dionysius, about whom they do not yet know whether he is asking for this reason.
πάντα δὲ ταῦτα ὑπὸ τὸ αὐτὸ καθόλου, ὅτι ὁ ἐπιβουλεύων τυραννίδι φυλακὴν αἰτεῖ.
And all these cases fall under the same universal proposition, that the one who plots for tyranny asks for a guard.
ἐξ ὧν μὲν οὖν λέγονται αἱ δοκοῦσαι εἶναι πίστεις ἀποδεικτικαί, εἴρηται.
So, then, the sources from which what are thought to be demonstrative proofs are spoken, have been stated.
§1.2.20τῶν δὲ ἐνθυμημάτων μεγίστη διαφορὰ καὶ μάλιστα λεληθυῖα σχεδὸν παρὰ πᾶσίν ἐστιν ἥπερ καὶ περὶ τὴν διαλεκτικὴν μέθοδον τῶν συλλογισμῶν·
Now, the greatest difference among enthymemes, and one which has almost entirely escaped the notice of everyone, is the very same one that also concerns the dialectical method of syllogisms.
τὰ μὲν γὰρ αὐτῶν ἐστι κατὰ τὴν ῥητορικὴν ὥσπερ καὶ κατὰ τὴν διαλεκτικὴν μέθοδον τῶν συλλογισμῶν, τὰ δὲ κατʼ ἄλλας τέχνας καὶ δυνάμεις, τὰς μὲν οὔσας τὰς δʼ οὔπω κατειλημμένας·
For some of them are in accordance with rhetoric, just as others are in accordance with the dialectical method of syllogisms, while others are in accordance with other arts and faculties, some of which already exist, and others of which have not yet been systematically grasped.
διὸ καὶ λανθάνουσίν τε τοὺς ἀκροατὰς καὶ ἁπτόμενοι κατὰ τρόπον μεταβαίνουσιν ἐξ αὐτῶν.
Therefore, they also escape the notice of the audience, and as the speakers touch upon them in the proper way, they transition out of them.
μᾶλλον δὲ σαφὲς ἔσται τὸ λεγόμενον διὰ πλειόνων ῥηθέν.
But what is being said will become more clear when discussed in greater detail.
§1.2.21λέγω γὰρ διαλεκτικούς τε καὶ ῥητορικοὺς συλλογισμοὺς εἶναι περὶ ὧν τοὺς τόπους λέγομεν· οὗτοι δʼ εἰσὶν οἱ κοινοὶ περὶ δικαίων καὶ φυσικῶν καὶ περὶ πολιτικῶν καὶ περὶ πολλῶν διαφερόντων εἴδει, οἷον ὁ τοῦ μᾶλλον καὶ ἧττον τόπος· οὐδὲν γὰρ μᾶλλον ἔσται ἐκ τούτου συλλογίσασθαι ἢ ἐνθύμημα εἰπεῖν περὶ δικαίων ἢ περὶ φυσικῶν ἢ περὶ ὁτουοῦν·
For I call those dialectical and rhetorical syllogisms about which we speak of places (topoi); and these are the ones common to questions of justice, physics, politics, and many other subjects differing in species, such as the place of the more and the less; for it will be no more difficult to syllogize or speak an enthymeme from this concerning justice than concerning physics or anything else whatever, although these differ in species.
καίτοι ταῦτα εἴδει διαφέρει. ἴδια δὲ ὅσα ἐκ τῶν περὶ ἕκαστον εἶδος καὶ γένος προτάσεών ἐστιν, οἷον περὶ φυσικῶν εἰσι προτάσεις ἐξ ὧν οὔτε ἐνθύμημα οὔτε συλλογισμὸς ἔστι περὶ τῶν ἠθικῶν, καὶ περὶ τούτων ἄλλαι ἐξ ὧν οὐκ ἔσται περὶ τῶν φυσικῶν· ὁμοίως δὲ τοῦτʼ ἔχει ἐπὶ πάντων.
On the other hand, specifics are those derived from premises concerning each species and genus; for instance, there are premises concerning physics from which there is neither an enthymeme nor a syllogism concerning ethics, and other premises concerning ethics from which there will be none concerning physics; and it is likewise in all cases.
κἀκεῖνα μὲν οὐ ποιήσει περὶ οὐδὲν γένος ἔμφρονα· περὶ οὐδὲν γὰρ ὑποκείμενόν ἐστιν· ταῦτα δὲ ὅσῳ τις ἂν βέλτιον ἐκλέγηται, λήσει ποιήσας ἄλλην ἐπιστήμην τῆς διαλεκτικῆς καὶ ῥητορικῆς· ἂν γὰρ ἐντύχῃ ἀρχαῖς, οὐκέτι διαλεκτικὴ οὐδὲ ῥητορικὴ ἀλλʼ ἐκείνη ἔσται ἧς ἔχει τὰς ἀρχάς.
And those [common places] will not make anyone wise concerning any genus, for they are not about any underlying subject; but as for these [specific places], the better someone selects them, the more they will unconsciously produce a science other than dialectic and rhetoric; for if they encounter first principles, it will no longer be dialectic or rhetoric, but rather that science whose principles they possess.
§1.2.22ἔστι δὲ τὰ πλεῖστα τῶν ἐνθυμημάτων ἐκ τούτων τῶν εἰδῶν λεγόμενα, τῶν κατὰ μέρος καὶ ἰδίων, ἐκ δὲ τῶν κοινῶν ἐλάττω.
And most enthymemes are spoken from these species—that is, the particular and specific ones—and fewer are from the common ones.
καθάπερ οὖν καὶ ἐν τοῖς Τοπικοῖς, καὶ ἐνταῦθα διαιρετέον τῶν ἐνθυμημάτων τά τε εἴδη καὶ τοὺς τόπους ἐξ ὧν ληπτέον.
Just as in the Topics, then, here too we must distinguish the species and the places from which enthymemes are to be taken.
λέγω δʼ εἴδη μὲν τὰς καθʼ ἕκαστον γένος ἰδίας προτάσεις, τόπους δὲ τοὺς κοινοὺς ὁμοίως πάντων.
And I call species the premises specific to each genus, and places those common to all alike.
πρότερον οὖν εἴπωμεν περὶ τῶν εἰδῶν· πρῶτον δὲ λάβωμεν τὰ γένη τῆς ῥητορικῆς, ὅπως διελόμενοι πόσα ἐστίν, περὶ τούτων χωρὶς λαμβάνωμεν τὰ στοιχεῖα καὶ τὰς προτάσεις.
First, then, let us speak about the species; and let us first grasp the genera of rhetoric, so that having divided how many they are, we may grasp their elements and premises separately for each.

Notes

  1. 1.2.19ὃν οὐκ ἴσασίν ¦35¦ πω εἰ διὰ τοῦτο αἰτεῖ — A syntactic structure of prolepsis (anticipation). The pronoun referring to Dionysius, which logically serves as the subject of the indirect question ('whether he is asking for this reason' introduced by εἰ), is syntactically pulled up into the main clause as the relative pronoun ὃν in the accusative case, appearing as if it were the direct object of ἴσασιν.
  2. 1.2.20ἥπερ καὶ περὶ τὴν διαλεκτικὴν μέθοδον — The relative pronoun ἥπερ (feminine singular nominative) refers back to μεγíστη διαφορá in the main clause. The accompanying particle καí functions adverbially ('also' or 'likewise'), highlighting the parallel nature of this difference in both rhetoric and dialectic.
  3. 1.2.21κἀκεῖνα μὲν οὐ ποιήσει περὶ οὐδὲν γένος ἔμφρονα — The subject κἀκεῖνα (καὶ ἐκεῖνα) is a neuter plural, and thus takes a singular verb (ποιήσει) according to Greek grammatical rules. The verb ποιήσει is used with the accusative adjective ἔμφρονα to mean 'to render [someone] expert/wise', where the semantic direct object (e.g., 'a person') is syntactically omitted.
  4. 1.2.21λήσει ποιήσας ἄλλην ἐπιστήμην — The verb λανθάνω (here in the future tense λήσει) combined with the participle ποιήσας forms the classic idiomatic construction meaning 'to do something without being noticed' or 'to do something unconsciously'. The subject is the indefinite pronoun τις.

Cite this passage

Aristotle, Rhetoric §1.2.19-1.2.22. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0086.tlg038.humanitext-grc2:1.2.19-1.2.22

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.