Rhetoric and Law in Aelius Aristides : Classical Roots and Modern Perspectives

Dimitrios Karadimas 韓國西洋古典學會 2012 西洋古典學硏究 Vol.47 No.-

The paper discusses a theory by Aelius Aristides, a Greek rhetor of the second century AD, about the relationship between rhetoric and law. This theory appears in Aristides’ long treatise To Plato: In Defence of Rhetoric (cf. 205-234 Behr) as a part of his effort to defend his discipline, i. e. rhetoric, against Plato’s accusations. The paper will present Aristides’ views on the matter of law-rhetoric relationship and it will also try to trace back the roots of his basic ideas. The possible connection between Aristides’ theory and its own age will be also explored. Before closing the paper, I will shortly argue that Aristides, due to this theory, can be regarded as a forerunner of modern theories advocating the close relationship of rhetoric and law. Aelius Aristides writes on law and rhetoric in the heart of the Second Sophistic (in the middle of the second century AD), when rhetoric plays a prominent role in the society of the eastern parts of the Empire. He discusses the subject of the origin of rhetoric, as well as that of the relationship of rhetoric to legislation and to justice. Rhetoric and persuasion came, according to him, as a remedy for the lack of equality and justice in society. Legislation, Aristides maintains, is a part of rhetoric, since the nature of law is the same as that of rhetoric (its mission is to secure justice in society)· legislation is, however, subordinate to rhetoric, since rhetoric is absolutely indispensable for introducing legislation and enacting laws. Moreover, dispensation of justice is not possible without the aid of rhetoric. Aristides stresses that it belongs to rhetoric’s nature to defend just and only just laws. Aristides’ theory exploits positions and ideas used by great thinkers of the classical era (Gorgias, Isocrates, Plato, and Aristotle). The only point of Aristides’ discussion which brings specific contemporary elements into the argumentation is the downgrading of jurors, who are placed halfway between the positions of orators and those of public executioners. Finally, I am suggesting that Aristides’ rhetorical conception of law is not only linked to the relevant ideas of the ancient times, but also to the modern conception of law as a part of rhetoric. Well-known modern theories such as those by Toulmin, Perelman, Viehweg, and Esser take law, implicitly or explicitly, as a part of rhetoric and, in this respect, they work within the framework set by Aristides. Besides, there are modern trends in legal education which are very close to Aristides’ educational implications, and also rhetorical conceptions of law (see, e.g., White) that seem to just reproduce Aristides’ ideas.

이소크라테스 수사학의 교육적 의미

이영주,유재봉 한국교육사상학회 2019 敎育思想硏究 Vol.33 No.2

The purpose of this study is to correctly understand the rhetoric distorted by the sophist in the light of the Isocrates' rhetoric. To this end, we criticize the sophist's rhetoric, defend Isocrates’ rhetoric, and suggest some educational implications. Rhetoric is a discipline which teaches spoken and written language, although most sophists misused rhetoric. It is a kind of language skill or a persuasion skill. Isocrates’ rhetoric seems to be criticized in terms of its aim, content, and method. The major problems of sophist's rhetoric are: concerning the aim of rhetoric, sophists pursued personal benefits rather than public interests; regarding the content of rhetoric, sophists was intended to persuade others one's personal opinion or view as if it is knowledge or truth; and regarding the method of rhetoric, sophists taught the letters of the alphabet, regardless of examining the nature of knowledge. For Isocrates, however, the essence of rhetoric is communication with all the things that happen in the world. It is possible when communication is primarily with oneself. In order to be able to speak correctly, first of all the right mind (orthē doxa) should be formed. Isocrates' rhetoric shows how we understand rhetoric that cultivates the right personality. It also implies that teaching rhetoric in school leads to the acquisition of knowledge and an upright mind. 이 논문의 목적은 왜곡되어 온 수사학을 이소크라테스의 수사학에 비추어 올바르게 이해하고, 그것이 교육에 주는 함의를 찾는 데 있다. 수사학은 흔히 소피스트들이 추구해 왔으며, 또한 소크라테스나 플라톤에 의해 비판받아 온 것으로 받아들여 온 경향이 있다. 소크라테스나 플라톤에 따르면, 소피스트들이 추구한 수사학은 신념 혹은 의견에 불과한 것을 진리 혹은 지식인 것처럼 설득시키는 기술이며, 수사학을 가르치는 목적은 민회 및 재판에서 승리함으로써 사적 이익을 추구하고 부를 축적하는 데 있었다. 그러나 이소크라테스가 보기에, 수사학의 본질은 타인을 설득하는 것뿐만 아니라 세상만사와 소통하는 것이며, 그것은 일차적으로 자신과의 소통이 올바르게 이루어질 때 가능하다. 올바른 말이 가능하기 위해서는 먼저 올바른 마음이 형성되어야 하기 때문이다. 이소크라테스의 수사학은 적절한 언어(logos) 구사를 통해 실제(praxis) 문제를 제대로 이해하고 올바른 의견(doxa)을 가지게 되는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이소크라테스 수사학은 한편으로는 소피스트에 의해 왜곡된 수사학의 올바른 의미를 드러내 주고, 다른 한편으로 언어를 통한 마음 함양을 강조함으로써 수사학 교육의 방향성을 제시하는 데 그 의미가 있다.

语言修辞的传播要素

方珍平 한국중국언어문화연구회 2010 한중언어문화연구 Vol.- No.23

This article is a special analysis starting from methods and steps of communication perspective. It focuses on the main factors of language rhetoric activities that including the subject of rhetoric, the object of rhetoric, the content of rhetoric, the channel of rhetoric and the effect of rhetoric. Through the brief analysis of these communicational-factors, we clarify the differences of language rhetoric from language behavior, so that the connotation of rhetoric emerged.

동서양 비교수사학의 출발점에 대한 제안

김헌 서강대학교 인문과학연구소 2009 서강인문논총 Vol.0 No.26

“What is rhetoric?”should be answered by answering the question “What was rhetoric?”To answer the question“ What was rhetoric?”, we should go to the point at which the term rhetoric was born. Then we could encounter the Aristotelian tradition and recognize that the Greek and Roman rhetoric was developed in the oral tradition and in democratic public spheres. But with the collapse of the public spheres, rhetoric was losing the political (and democratic) meaning. It was gradually reduced to the skill of composition and literary decoration: so-called the reduced rhetoric. The western rhetoric that we received was the rhetoric reduced to literary composition whereas the Xiuci with which we received the western rhetoric had a changed meaning from its own original significance into a reduced connotation. Since Xiuci was very closely related to the literary decoration, the reduced rhetoric could be translated as Xiucixue. But the historical consideration of rhetoric allows us to recover rhetoric’s original form from the reduced rhetoric. For example, Confucius conceptualized the Xiuci in terms of Wen(文). On the narrow scale, this term was related to literacy, but on the larger scale, to moral character and personality. If we restore, by historical considerations, the rhetoric reduced to the domain of literature, we could see the art of orator that functioned in the oral and political tradition, whereas we could see the tradition of Wen (文), i.e. of literacy as a guiding principle of cultivating the character and the personality, if the Confucian concept of Xiuci were restored to its original significance in the Sinosphere. Therefore, Isocrates seems to be more appropriate than Aristotle for the starting point of the comparative rhetoric between the Eastern and Western World. In fact, Isocrates’rhetorical education is itself qualified as one of philosophy, the ultimate aim of which is not simple eloquence or persuasive rhetorical ability, but moral qualities of character, such as honesty, sobriety, and justice. This philosophy, labeled as fostering the ability to persuade by means of discourse, leads to cultivation of the character and personality. “수사학이란 무엇인가?”라는 질문에 답하기 위해서는 먼저“수사학이란 무엇 이었는가?”라는 질문에 답을 구해야만 한다.“ 수사학이란 무엇이었나?”라는 질 문에 답하기 위해서 우리는 수사학이 탄생한 지점으로 돌아가야 한다. 그때 우리 는 아리스토텔레스의 전통을 만나게 되며, 그리스와 로마의 수사학이 구술의 전통과 민주주의의 공적인 영역에서 발전했음을 알게 된다. 하지만 공적인 영역이 쇠퇴함에 따라, 수사학은 본래의 정치적이고 민주적인 의미를 잃어갔고, 점점 더 작문과 문학적 장식으로 축소되었다. 이른바“줄어든 수사학”이 된 것이다. 서구 수사학을 한자문화권이 받아들였을 때, 그것은 문학적 작문으로 축소된 수사학이었으며,“ 수사”라는 말을 가지고 서구의 수사학을 받아들였을 때, 그것 도 역시 본래의 의미를 잃고 축소된 의미로 사용되고 있었다. 당시“수사”란 문 학적 장식과 밀접하게 관련되어 있었기 때문에 줄어든 수사학은“수사학”으로 번역될 수 있었던 것이다. 하지만 수사학에 대한 역사적인 검토를 한다면 우리는 줄어든 수사학으로부터 수사학의 원래 형태를 회복할 수 있다. 예를 들어 공자는 수사를 문(文)이라는 용어로 개념화하였는데, 문이란 좁은 의미에서는 문학과 연 결되어 있었지만, 좀더 넓은 의미로는 도적인 품성과 인격과 관련되어 있었다. 우리가 역사적인 검토를 통해 문학의 영역 안으로 축소된 서구의 수사학을 회 복한다면, 우리는 구어적이고 정치적인 전통 속에서 기능하는 연설가의 기술을 보게 될 것이며, 우리가 공자의 수사 개념을 한자 문화권 안에서 본래의 의미를 회복한다면, 우리는 품성과 인격을 수양하는 지도원리로서의 문의 전통을 볼 수 있을 것이다. 따라서 동서양 사이의 비교수사학의 출발점을 위해 이소크라테스 는 아리스토텔레스보다도 더 적절하다. 실제로 이소크라테스의 수사학 교육은 그 자체로 철학의 하나로 규정되며, 그것의 궁극적인 목적은 단순히 유창함이나 설득력이 높은 수사학적인 능력이 아니라, 정직함, 절제와 정의감 등과 같은 품 성의 도덕적 자질을 기르는 것이었다. 말을 수단으로 설득하는 능력을 기르는 것 이라 할 수 있는 이 철학은 결국 품성과 인격을 수양하는 데로 인도한다.

이소크라테스의 수사학 교육과정 연구

이영주 ( Young-ju Lee ),유재봉 ( Jae-bong Yoo ) 한국교육과정학회 2019 교육과정연구 Vol.37 No.2

Rhetoric is often seen as a technique of persuasion by means of language skills. This misunderstanding of rhetoric is due to the influence of Sophists, whose understanding of rhetoric was wrong. What is then the correct understanding of rhetoric? How should rhetoric be taught? To answer this, this article aims to explore Isocrates' rhetoric curriculum. For Isocrates, the role of rhetoric was to cultivate the right mind by Logos. When rhetoric was taught at Isocrates' school, the three elements, i.e., the natural talent, knowledge, and practice should be considered. The curriculum should also be designed according to these three elements. He insisted that rhetoric serves to train the mind by logos to prepare for practical wisdom (phronesis). Rhetoric also appropriately adorns the whole speech with striking thoughts and gives it a good flow and a melodious tone. According to Isocrates, rhetoric is cultivated by writing for the common good and expressing the mind through writing. Isocrates' rhetoric education implies that the purpose of rhetoric should be to cultivate the right mind and acquire practical wisdom beyond language skills.

『백과전서Encyclopédie』에 나타난 ‘수사학’

이종오 ( Lee Jong Oh ) 한국외국어대학교 EU연구소 2006 EU연구 Vol.- No.19

This article's objective is to understand 'rhetoric', which appears in the French Encyclopedia, through fields of rhetoric, historicity study, education of rhetoric, the rise and fall of rhetoric from the times of Aristotle to the present-in other words, it tries to understand the death and rebirth of rhetoric. Ancient rhetoric skills meant making good speeches, writing well, and persuading the public. Though originally a Greek legacy, the tradition of rhetoric was first adopted by the religious sectors of the Renaissance and Classicism. However, rhetoric that includes these backgrounds and concepts has always been criticized. Socrates defined rhetoric as a speech skill of exaggeration and lies, and Montaigne pointed out the adverse effects of using too much rhetoric. Still, it is difficult to say that the traditional rhetoric has disappeared completely, because using rhetoric has rather expanded in a more general way, through the death and rebirth within the education system. Through these processes, the concept of traditional rhetoric, along with the Russian formalism, is reorganized into a new rhetoric.

생태비평에 대한 수사학적 분석

김경미(KYOUNG-MI KIM) 한국수사학회 2005 수사학 Vol.0 No.3

This paper is an attempt to approach rhetorical analysis on the eco-criticism. In recent years the study of rhetoric is very active. Rhetoric concerns about various fields, that is language, advertisement, economics, pop culture and writings etc. Also in recent years the study of rhetoric emphasizes the rhetoric of discovery. Therefore, Rhetoric has an important meaning for critic method. This paper suggests that to analysis on the eco-criticism based on Rhetoric be an important practice to discover some rhetorical skills on the study of eco-criticism. In this paper, I've tried apply the methodology of western rhetoric to making an analysis of the eco-criticism article, "For the Green Literature", written by Nam-Ho Lee. This article is an example for rhetorical approach. He insists that literature should be green. I analyzed rhetorically whether his argument is a right opinion or not and what he intended in the article. On the base of rhetorical concepts, I did meta analysis on the article. Especially, I've tried to apply "kairos" and "stasis", a put of Invention, of Rhetoric concepts to this study. This paper argued how to use rhetorical factors in order to persuade the reader. Although sometimes his opinion was wanting in consistency, he(Nam-ho Lee) properly used those rhetoric concepts to persuade the reader in his work. As a result, Rhetoric is very useful way to analyze a literary criticism without being prejudiced against a person who has a difference between schools, regions, and ideologies. I think that Rhetoric can give us new critic method of a literary criticism including the eco-criticism. However, we mist not forget to make rhetorical concepts an appropriate measure to analyze a literary criticism. This study is not a completion but an attempt of analyzing based on rhetoric. I hope to put the last hand to my work in the future.

서양 중세의 수사학

강상진(Sang-Jin Kang) 한국수사학회 2006 수사학 Vol.0 No.4

One of the central features in the medieval history of western rhetoric is the Christianization of the classical rhetoric. The core of the justification of the secular rhetoric for the Christian end consists in the fact that the Holy Scripture is written in the manner of rhetorical speech, and thus learning rhetoric helps in understanding the true teachings of the Bible. The Christianization of the classical rhetoric culminates in the program of lectio divina (prayerful reading of the Bible) in the monastery, which was practically the only institution for the education and culture in Western Latin world since 5th century. As an orthopraxis of monastic life, lectio divina realizes the Christian ideal of morality, which is guided and formed by rhetorical precepts. This function of the 'monastic rhetoric' as the moral principle of everyday practices is to be regarded as the explicit formulation of the assumption implicit in the classical rhetoric, namely the education of a good man through the rhetorical practices. As is generally known, the modern rhetoric does not accept the Christian end. The question is whether this attitude implies the refusal of the moral justification of the rhetoric too. If the modern rhetoric denies the moral justification unlike the medieval rhetoric, it is worthwhile to question whether the alleged 'decrease' of the modern rhetoric is due to this refusal.

세계 속의 한국 수사학

나민구(NA, Mingu) 한국수사학회 2015 수사학 Vol.0 No.23

Since the establishment of Korean Society of the Rhetoric in 2003, Korean rhetoricians started to research about the rhetoric of Occident and Orient and the before and now in Korea. In 2005 we participated at the first time in the international conference organized by International Society for the History of Rhetoric. At the same time we have been meeting many rhetoricians from many foreign countries. We also have been hold several times the international conference of rhetoric like the first on at Korean University in 2006, the second one at Seoul National University in 2010, the third one at Incheon National University in 2012 and the fourth one at Confucius Institute in Seoul in 2014. Finally this year 2015 ten Koreans scholars participated at the conference of ISHR at Tubingen and participated at the Council meeting, opened Round Table Talk and presented papers. We hope that the relationship between Korea and other contries vis-a-vis rhetorical research will growing. Likewise, the study on the Koran traditional rhetoric and on the general rhetoric will expand over the world.

2005年以来韩国的汉语修辞学研究简介

나민구 한국중국언어문화연구회 2010 한중언어문화연구 Vol.- No.24

At present, the public interest and studies related to rhetoric are increasing day by day. Though rhetoric has been developed both in the East and the West in parallel, the aspects of its development are different from each other. In the West,centered on Europe, a variety of studies have been actively conducted on the basis of long tradition of rhetoric from the days of Aristotle in ancient Greece and to the present day. On the other hand, China, who represents the East, also has maintained her long tradition of ancient rhetoric. Modern rhetoric was emerged as an academic subject in China in 1938 ‐‐ quite late compared with the West ‐‐ when Chen Wangdao published An Introduction to Rhetoric; from that time on, the basic framework of modern Chinese rhetoric had been set up, establishing serious academic systems. Nowadays, Chinese rhetoric is making up for its idiosyncrasy by dint of conducting studies on the theories of rhetoric and exchanging ideas with other academic fields,also providing other investigators in closely‐related academic subjects with a breakthrough that allows them to overcome their academic constraints. The number of the books and papers that have been published in Korea in relation to Chinese rhetoric over the last 5 years in the 2000s is not so big. However, they can be regarded as remarkable achievements compared with the research achievements accrued over the past a few decades. Given the huge scale of communication going on between nations, people, and academics, the studies on Chinese rhetoric in Korea are expected to prevail in the future. Consequently, it is high time that the more active exchange with local Chinese scholars be highly necessary.