THE CONTEMPORARY STATUS OF

A GREAT IDE A

THE NEW RHETORIC: A THEORY OF PRACTICAL REASONING

/ l O l P MW

C H A I M P E R E L M A N '

Reprinted from

THE GREAT IDE AS TODAY 1970

n a e d i a B r i t a n n i c a , I n c .

O o n t e n t s

P A R T O N E

The Idea of Révolution: A Symposium

Introduction 2

Arnold J. Toynbee Revolutionary Change 4

Ivan lllich The Need for Cultural Révolution 28

Paul Goodman Anarchism and Révolution 44

William F. Buckley, Jr. The Sorry Condition of Counterrevolutionary Doctrine 66

The Idea of Révolution in Great Books of the Western World 79

A S P E C I A L F E A T U R E

Robert Mann Beethoven 1770-1827 85

P A R T T W O

The Year's Developments in the Arts and Sciences

William Letwin Social Science and Practical Problems 92

Kenneth Rexrotfi Literature 138

R. H. Robins Linguistics 178

H. B. Veatch and M. S. Gram Philosophy and Ethics 228

P A R T T H R E E

The Contemporary Status of a Great Idea

Ch. Perelman The New Rhetoric: A Theory of Practical Reasoning 272

P A R T F O U R

Additions to the Great Books Library

Erasmus The Praise of Foliy 314

Lenin State and Révolution 386

Schiller The Death of Wallenstein, translated by Samuel Taylor Coleridge 454

I N D E X 1 9 6 1 - 1 9 70 /<^/ 531

T h e 1 9 6 0 s w i t nessed a rev iva l of in terest

in the i d e a of rhe to r i c . It is an i dea w i th a

long a n d s o m e t i m e s g l o r i o u s pas t , as is

i n d i c a t e d by its a p p e a r a n c e annong the

102 i d e a s into w h i c h the Syntopicon is

d i v i d e d , but a long t i m e had e l a p s e d

s i n c e it had exc i t ed a n y in te l lec tua l or

a c a d é m i e interest . T h e n in 1958 a t w o ­

v o l u m e w o r k in F rench a p p e a r e d , wr i t t en

by Ch. P e r e l m a n a n d L. O l b r e c h t s ­ T y t e c a

a n d en t i t l ed The New Rhetoric: A Treatise

on Argumentation. M o r e t h a n any s ing le

i tem, th is w o r k a r o u s e d a r e n e w e d in terest

in the i d e a , as is a t tes ted by the ar t i c les ,

b o o k s , j o u r n a l s , a n d c o n f é r e n c e s tha t have

been d e v o t e d to t he b o o k a n d its thes is .

C h a i m Pere lman , w h o is mos t c l ose l y

a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the new rhe to r i c , is a Pro­

fessor of P h i l o s o p h y at the Free Un ivers i t y

of B r u s s e l s and a d i r ec to r of t he Cen te r

for t he P h i l o s o p h y of L a w a n d t h e Na­

t i ona l C e n t e r for L o g i c a l Resea rch . B o r n

in W a r s a w in 1912, he w e n t to B e l g i u m

in 1925, w h e r e he t o o k a d o c t o r a l e in law

as we l l a s in p h i l o s o p h y at t he Free Un i ­

vers i ty o f Brusse ls . A f te r w a r se rv i ce in

B e l g i u m , w h e r e he w a s a l eade r of t he

R é s i s t a n c e m o v e m e n t , he r e t u m e d to t he

un ive rs i t y as P ro fessor of Log i c , E th ics ,

a n d M e t a p h y s i c s a n d b e g a n a r e m a r k a b l y

p r o d u c t i v e career . The b i b l i o g r a p h y of

h is w r i t i n g s I nc ludes s o m e 150 t i t les, f ou r

of w h i c h are b o o k s t r ans la ted into Eng l i sh .

His w o r k h a s been w i d e l y t r ans la ted , a n d

he has r e c e l v e d h o n o r a r y d e g r e e s f r o m

the Un i ve rs i t y of F l o rence a n d the H e b r e w

Univers i ty o f Jé rusa lem. He is we l l k n o w n

in Nor th A m e r i c a , hav ing s e r v e d as v is i t ­

ing P r o f e s s o r at P e n n s y l v a n i e S ta te Un i ­

vers i ty , t h e State Un ivers i t y of N e w Y o r k

at Bu f fa lo , a n d M c G i l l Un ivers i ty .

The New Rhetoric: A Theory of Practical Reasoning

The Loss oj a Humanistic Tradition—Tht last t w o years of s econda ry é d u c a t i o n i n B e l g i u m u s e d t o b e ca l l ed t r a d i t i o n a l l y " P o e t r y " a n d " R h e t ­o r i c . " 1 st i l l r e m e m b e r t h a t , o v e r fo r ty years ago, I h a d t o s t u d y the "Elé ­m e n t s of R h e t o r i c " f o r a final h igh - schoo l e x a m i n a t i o n , a n d I l e a r n e d m o r e o r less by h e a r t t h e c o n t e n t s of a smal l m a n u a l , t h e first p a r t of w h i c h c o n c e r n e d t h e syl logism a n d t h e s econd the f igures of style. L a t e r , i n t h e un ive r s i ty , 1 t o o k a c o u r s e of logic w h i c h cove red , a m o n g o t h e r t h ings , t h e ana lys i s of t h e sy l logism. I t h e n l e a r n e d t h a t log ic is a f o r m a i d i s c i p l i n e t h a t s t ud i e s t h e s t r u c t u r e of h y p o t h e t i c o - d e d u c t i v e r e a s o n i n g . S ince t h e n 1 h a v e o f t e n w o n d e r e d w h a t l i n k a p ro fe s so r of r h e t o r i c c o u l d poss ib ly d i scover b e t w e e n t h e sy l log ism a n d t h e figures of s tyle w i t h t h e i r e x o t i c n a m e s t h a t a r e so d i f f i cu l t t o r e m e m b e r .

L a c k of c la r i ty c o n c e r n i n g t h e i dea of r h e t o r i c is a l so a p p a r e n t i n t h e a r t i c l e o n t h e s u b j e c t i n t h e Encyclopœdia Britannica, w h e r e r h e t o r i c is d e f i n e d as " t h e use of l a n g u a g e as a n a r t b a s e d o n a b o d y of o r g a n i z e d k n o w l e d g e . " B u t w h a t does t h i s m e a n ? T h e t e c h n i q u e o r a r t of l a n g u a g e i n g ê n e r a i , o r o n l y t h a t of l i t e r a r y p r o s e as d i s t i nc t f r o m poe t ry? M u s t r h e t o r i c b e c o n c e i v e d of as t h e a r t of o r a t o r y — t h a t is, as t h e a r t of p u b l i c s p e a k i n g ? T h e a u t h o r of t h e a r t i c l e n o t e s t h a t fo r A r i s t o t l e r h e t o r i c is t h e a r t of p e r s u a s i o n . W e a r e f u r t h e r t o l d t h a t t he o r a t o r ' s p u r p o s e , ac-c o r d i n g to C ice ro ' s d é f i n i t i o n , is t o i n s t r u c t , to m o v e , a n d to p l ease . Q u i n t i l i a n s u m s u p th i s v iew i n h i s l a p i d a r y style as ars bene dicendi, t h e a r t of s p e a k i n g wel l . T h i s p h r a s e c a n r e f e r e i t h e r t o t h e efficacy, o r t h e m o r a l i t y , or t h e b e a u t y of a speech , t h i s a m b i g u i t y b e i n g b o t h a n a d v a n -t a g e a n d a d r a w b a c k .

F o r t hose of us w h o h a v e b e e n e d u c a t e d in a t i m e w h e n r h e t o r i c h a s ceased to p l a y a n essen t i a l p a r t i n é d u c a t i o n , t he i dea of r h e t o r i c h a s b e e n de f in i t e ly a s soc ia t ed w i t h t h e " f lowers of r h e t o r i c " — t h e n a m e u s e d f o r t h e figures of s tyle w i t h t h e i r l e a r n e d a n d i n c o m p r é h e n s i b l e n a m e s .

T r a n s l a t é e ! f r o m t h e F r e n c h b y E . G r i f f i n - C o l l a r t a n d O . B i r d . 2 7 3

The New Rhetoric

T h i s t r a d i t i o n is r e p r e s e n t e d by t w o F r e n c h a u t h o r s , César C h e s n e a u , s i eu r D u m a r s a i s , a n d P i e r r e F o n t a n i e r , w l io p r o v i d e d t h e bas ic t ex t s fo r t e a c h i n g w h a t was t a k e n fo r r h e t o r i c i n t h e e i g h t e e n t h a n d n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s . T h e w o r k of D u m a r s a i s , wl i i ch first a p p e a r e d i n 1730 a n d en-j o y e d a n e n o r m o u s success, is e n t i t l e d Concerning tropes or the différent ways in which one word can be taken in a language.^ F o n t a n i e r ' s b o o k , r e p r i n t e d i n 1968 u n d e r t h e t i t le The figures of discourse, u n i t é s i n o n e v o l u m e t w o works , w h i c h a p p e a r e d re spec t ive ly i n 1821 a n d 1827, u n d e r t h e t i t l e s A classical rnanual for the study of tropes a n d Figures other than tropes.^

T h è s e w o r k s a r e t h e o u t c o m e of w h a t m i g h t b e ca l l ed t h e styl is t ic t r a d i t i o n of r h e t o r i c , w h i c h was s t a r t e d by O r n e r T a l o n , t h e f r i e n d of P e t r u s R a m u s , i n h i s t w o b o o k s o n r h e t o r i c p u b l i s h e d i n 1572. T h e e x t r a o r d i n a r y i n f l u e n c e of R a m u s h i n d e r e d , a n d t o a l a rge e x t e n t a c t u a l l y d e s t r o y e d , t h e t r a d i t i o n of classical r h e t o r i c t h a t h a d b e e n d e v e l o p e d ove r t h e cou r se of t w e n t y c e n t u r i e s a n d w i t h w h i c h a r e a s soc ia ted t h e n a m e s of such w r i t e r s as Ar i s to t l e , C ice ro , Q u i n t i l i a n , a n d St. A u g u s t i n e .

F o r t h e a n c i e n t s , r h e t o r i c was t h e t h e o r y of pe r suas ive d i s cou r se a n d i n c l u d e d five p a r t s : inventio, dispositio, elocutio, memoria, a n d actio. T h e f i rs t p a r t d e a l t w i t h t h e a r t of f i n d i n g t h e m a t e r i a l s of d i scourse , e spec ia l ly a r g u m e n t s , b y u s i n g c o m m o n o r spécifie loci—the topoi s t u d i e d i n w o r k s w h i c h , f o l l o w i n g Ar i s t o t l e ' s e x a m p l e , w e r e ca l l ed Topics.* T h e s e c o n d p a r t g a v e adv ice o n t h e p u r p o s i v e a r r a n g e m e n t o r o r d e r of dis­course , t h e method, as t h e R e n a i s s a n c e h u m a n i s t s ca l l ed i t . T h e t h i r d p a r t d e a l t m a i n l y w i t h style, t h e cho i ce of t e r m s a n d ph ra se s ; t h e f o u r t h w i t h t h e a r t of m e m o r i z i n g t h e speech ; w h i l e t h e fifth c o n c e r n e d t h e a r t of d e l i v e r i n g i t .

R a m u s a lso w o r k e d fo r t h e r e f o r m of logic a n d d i a l ec t i c a l o n g t h e l ines l a i d d o w n by R o d o l p h u s Agr i co l a in h i s De inventione dialectica (1479) a n d by t h e h u m a n i s t s w h o f o l l o w e d h i m in seek ing to b r e a k a w a y f r o m scho las t i c f o r m a l i s m by r e s t o r i n g t h e u n i o n of é l o q u e n c e a n d p h i -l o s o p h y a d v o c a t e d by Cice ro . T h i s r e f o r m cons i s t ed essent ia l ly in r e j e c t i n g t h e classical o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n sc ience a n d o p i n i o n t h a t h a d led A r i s t o t l e t o d r a w a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n a n a l y t i c a l a n d d i a l ec t i c a l r e a s o n i n g — t h e f o r m e r d e a l i n g w i t h necessary r ea son ings , t h e l a t t e r w i t h p r o b a b l e ones . A n a l y t i c a l r e a s o n i n g is t he c o n c e r n of Ar i s t o t l e ' s Analytics,\ d i a l e c t i c a l r e a s o n i n g t h a t of t h e Topics, On Sophistical Réfutations, a n d t h e Rhetoric.\

A g a i n s t t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n , t h i s is w h a t R a m u s lias t o say i n h i s Dialectic:

Aristotle, or more precisely the exponents of Aristotle's théories, thought that there are two arts of discussion and reasoning, one applying to science and called Logic, the other dealing with opin­ion and called Dialectic. In this—with ail due respect to such great

274 masiers—they were greatly mistaken. Indeed thèse two names, Dia-

Chaim Perelman

lectic and Logic, generally mean the very same thing, like the words d i a l e g e s t h a i and l og izesd ia i from which they are derived and descended, that is, dispute or reason. . . . Furthermore, al-though things known are either necessary and scientific, or con­tingent and a matter of opinion, just as our sight can perceive ail colors, both unchanging and changeable, in the same way the art oj knowing, that is Dialectic or Logic, is one and the same doctrine of reasoning well atout anything whatsoever. . . ?

As a r e su i t of th i s r e j e c t i o n , R a m u s u n i t é s i n h i s Dialectic w h a t A r i s t o t l e h a d s e p a r a t e d . H e d iv ide s h i s w o r k i n t o t w o pa r t s , o n e c o n c e r n i n g i n v e n ­t ion , t h e o t h e r j u d g m e n t . F u r t h e r , h e i n c l u d e s i n d ia l ec t i c p a r t s t h a t w e r e f o r m e r l y r e g a r d e d as b e l o n g i n g t o r h e t o r i c : t h e t h e o r y of i n v e n t i o n o r loci a n d t h a t of d i spos i t i on , c a l l e d method. M e m o r y is c o n s i d e r e d as m e r e l y a r e f l ec t i on of thèse f i rs t t w o pa r t s , a n d r h e t o r i c — t h e " a r t of s p e a k i n g wel l , " of " é l o q u e n t a n d o r n a t e l a n g u a g e " — i n c l u d e s t h e s t u d y of t ropes , of figures of style, a n d of o r a t o r i c a l de l ive ry , a i l of w h i c h a r e c o n s i d e r e d as of lesser i m p o r t a n c e .

T h u s was b o r n t h e t r a d i t i o n of m o d e m r h e t o r i c , b e t t e r ca l l ed stylistic, as t h e s t u d y of t e c h n i q u e s of u n u s u a l exp re s s ion . F o r F o n t a n i e r , as w e h a v e seen, r h e t o r i c is r e d u c e d t o t h e s t u d y of figures of style, w h i c h h e de f ines as " t h e m o r e o r less r e m a r k a b l e t r a i t s a n d fo rms , t h e p h r a s e s w i t h a m o r e o r less h a p p y t u r n , by w h i c h t h e exp re s s ion of ideas , t h o u g h t s , a n d f ee l ings r e m o v e s t h e d i s c o u r s e m o r e or less f a r a w a y f r o m w h a t w o u l d h a v e b e e n i ts s imp le , c o m m o n e x p r e s s i o n . " *

R h e t o r i c , o n th i s c o n c e p t i o n , is essen t ia l ly a n a r t of exp re s s ion a n d , m o r e especia l ly , of l i t e r a r y c o n v e n t i o n a l i z e d e x p r e s s i o n ; i t is an a r t of style. So i t is sti l l r e g a r d e d by J e a n P a u l h a n i n h i s b o o k Les fleurs de Tarbes ou la terreur dans les lettres (1941, b u t p u b l i s h e d first as a r t i c l e s i n 1936).

T h e s a m e v iew of r h e t o r i c was t a k e n i n I t a ly d u r i n g t h e R e n a i s s a n c e , d e s p i t e t h e success of h u m a n i s m . I n s p i r e d by t h e C i c e r o n i a n idéa l of t h e u n i o n of p h i l o s o p h y w i t h é l o q u e n c e , h u m a n i s t s such as L o r e n z o V a l l a s o u g h t t o u n i t é d i a l ec t i c a n d r h e t o r i c . B u t they gave d e f i n i t e p r i m a c y t o r h e t o r i c , t h u s e x p r e s s i n g t h e i r r e v o l t a g a i n s t scholas t ic f o r m a l i s m .

T h i s h u m a n i s t i c t r a d i t i o n c o n t i n u e d fo r over a c e n t u r y a n d finally p r o d u c e d i n t h e De principiis b y M a r i o N izo l i o (1553) its m o s t s ign i f i can t w o r k f r o m a p h i l o s o p h i c a l p o i n t of v iew. Less t h a n t en years la ter , h o w -ever , i n 1562, F r a n c e s c o P a t r i z i p u b l i s h e d i n h i s Rhetoric t h e m o s t v i o l e n t a t t a c k u p o n th i s d i s c ip l i ne , t o w h i c h h e d e n i e d a n y p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n t e r e s t w h a t s o e v e r . G i a m b a t t i s t a Vico ' s r e a c t i o n c a m e l a t e a n d p r o d u c e d n o i m m é d i a t e r e su i t . R h e t o r i c b e c a m e a w h o U y f o r m a i d i sc ip l ine—any l i v i n g

• GBWW, V o l . 8 , p p . 1 3 9 - 2 2 3 . t GBWW, V o l . 8 , p p . 3 7 - 1 3 7 . t GBWW, V o l . 8 , p p . 1 3 9 - 2 5 3 ; V o l . 9 , p p . 5 8 5 - 6 7 5 . 2 7 5

The New Rhetoric

i d e a s t h a t i t c o n t a i n e d b e i n g i n c l u d e d in Aes the t ics . G e r m a n y is o n e c o u n t r y w h e r e classical r h e t o r i c h a s c o n t i n u e d to b e

c a r e f u l l y s t u d i e d , especia l ly by scho la r s such as F r i e d r i c h Blass, W i l h e l m Kro l l , a n d F r i e d r i c h So lmsen , w h o d e v o t e d m o s t of t h e i r Hves t o this s tudy . Yet , e v e n so, r h e t o r i c h a s b e e n r e g a r d e d o n l y as t h e t h e o r y of h t e r a r y p ro se . H e i n r i c h L a u s b e r g h a s p r o d u c e d a m o s t r e m a r k a b l e work , w h i c h is t h e bes t too l i n ex i s t ence fo r t h e s t u d y of r h e t o r i c a l t e r m i n o l o g y a n d t h e s t r u c t u r e of d iscourse , a n d yet in t h e a u t h o r ' s o w n eyes i t is on ly a con­t r i b u t i o n t o t h e s t u d y of l i t e r a r y l a n g u a g e a n d t r ad i t i on . ^

T h e o l d t r a d i t i o n of r h e t o r i c h a s b e e n k e p t l onges t i n G r e a t Br i ta in— it is s t i l l ve ry m u c h a l ive a m o n g Scots j u r i s t s — t h a n k s t o t h e i m p o r t a n c e of p s y c h o l o g y in t h e e m p i r i c i s m of B a c o n , Locke , a n d H u m e , a n d to t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h e Scot t i sh p h i l o s o p h y of c o m m o n sensé. T h i s t r a d i t i o n , in w h i c h t h e t h e o r y of i n v e n t i o n is r e d u c e d to a m i n i m u m a n d in t e re s t is f o c u s e d o n t h e pe r suas ive aspec t of d i scourse , is r e p r e s e n t e d by such o r i g i n a l w o r k s as G e o r g e C a m p b e l l ' s The Philosophy of Rhetoric (1776) a n d R i c h a r d W h a t e l y ' s Eléments of Rhetoric (1828). I n th is w o r k , W h a t e l y , w h o was a log ic ian , dea l s w i t h a r g u m e n t a t i v e c o m p o s i t i o n in g ê n e r a i a n d t h e a r t of e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e t r u t h of a p r o p o s i t i o n so as t o c o n v i n c e o the r s , r h e t o r i c b e i n g r e d u c e d to " a p u r e l y m a n a g e r i a l or supe r -v i sory sc ience ." ^ H i s d isc ip le , t h e f u t u r e C a r d i n a l J o h n H e n r y N e w m a n , a p p l i e d W h a t e l y ' s i deas t o t h e p r o b l e m s of f a i t h in h i s Grammar of Assent (1870). T h i s o u t l o o k sti l l consis ts i n see ing i n r h e t o r i c o n l y a t h e o r y of e x p r e s s i o n . I t was t h e v iew a d o p t e d by I v o r A r m s t r o n g R i c h a r d s i n h i s Principles of Literary Criticism ( p u b l i s h e d i n 1924) a n d i n h i s Philosophy of Rhetoric (1936).

W h i l e i n E u r o p e r h e t o r i c h a s b e e n r e d u c e d to stylistics a n d l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i sm, b e c o m i n g m e r e l y a p a r t of t h e s t u d y of l i t e r a t u r e i n s o f a r as i t w a s t a u g h t a t ai l , i n t h e U n i t e d S ta tes t h e a p p e a r a n c e of a speech p r o ­fess ion b r o u g h t a b o u t a u n i q u e d e v e l o p m e n t .

S a m u e l Silas C u r r y , i n a b o o k e n t i t l e d The Province of Expression (1891), was t h e first to e m p h a s i z e s p o k e n d i scour se a n d its de l ivery , r a t h e r t h a n t h e c o m p o s i t i o n of l i t e r a ry p rose , a n d to c l a i m a u t o n o m y fo r speech as o p p o s e d to w r i t t e n c o m p o s i t i o n . " E x p r e s s i o n , " as h e u n d e r s t o o d i t , d i d n o t m e a n t h e way in w h i c h i dea s a n d f ee l ings a r e expressed i n a l i t e r a r y f o r m , b u t i n s t e a d t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e y a r e c o m m u n i c a t e d by m e a n s of a n a r t of " d e l i v e r y . " C o n c e r n fo r t h i s é l é m e n t , a p p a r e n t l y o n e of lesser i m p o r t a n c e , c lea r ly r evea l s a r e n e w e d i n t e r e s t i n t he a u d i ­ence , a n d th i s i n t e r e s t h e l p e d to p r o m o t e t h e c r é a t i o n of a n e w " s p e e c h p r o f e s s i o n , " s e p a r a t e f r o m t h e t e a c h i n g of E n g l i s h a n d of E n g l i s h l i ter ­a t u r e . U n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e of W i l l i a m J a m e s , J a m e s A l b e r t W i n a n s p u b ­l i s h e d a v o l u m e e n t i t l e d Public Speaking (1915) t h a t firmly e s t ab l i s h ed a u n i o n b e t w e e n p ro fe s so r s of speech a n d those of psycho logy . W i t h t h e

276 c o o p é r a t i o n of special is ts i n a n c i e n t a n d m é d i é v a l r h e t o r i c , such as

Chaim Perelman

C h a r l e s S. B a l d w i n , H a r r y C a p l a n , L a n e C o o p e r , E v e r e t t L e e H u n t , a n d R i c h a r d M c K e o n , t h e w h o l e t r a d i t i o n of classical r h e t o r i c h a s been re-t raced . T h i s s t u d y h a s b e e n c o n t i n u e d a n d f u r t h e r d e v e l o p e d in t h e Works of W i l b u r S a m u e l H o w e l l , D o n a l d C. B r y a n t , K a r l R . Wal l ace , W a l t e r J . O n g , L l o y d F. Bi tzer , D o u g l a s E h n i n g e r , a n d M a r i e K. H o c h -m u t h . T h e w o r k of thèse schola rs—the t i t les of w h i c h c a n b e f o u n d in t h e B i b l i o g r a p h y t h a t h a s b e e n r e g u l a r l y p u b l i s h e d by t h e Qtiarterly Journal of Speech s ince 1915—const i tu tes a u n i q u e a c h i e v e m e n t w h i c h is as yet too l i t t le k n o w n o u t s i d e t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s J

An ornamental or a practical art?

T h e r e is n o t h i n g of p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n t e r e s t in a r h e t o r i c t h a t h a s t u r n e d i n t o a n a r t of e x p r e s s i o n , w h e t h e r l i t e r a ry o r verba l .* H e n c e it is n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t h e t e r m is m i s s ing e n t i r e l y f r o m b o t h A n d r é L a l a n d e ' s Vocabulaire technique et critique de la philosophie a n d t h e r é c e n t A m e r ­i can Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1967). I n t h e W e s t e r n t r a d i t i o n , " R h e t o r i c " h a s f r e q u e n t l y b e e n i d e n t i f i e d w i t h v e r b a l i s m a n d a n e m p t y , u n n a t u r a l , s t i l t ed m o d e of e x p r e s s i o n . R h e t o r i c t h e n b e c o m e s t h e symbol of t h e m o s t o u t d a t e d é l é m e n t s i n t h e é d u c a t i o n of t h e o ld rég ime , t h e é l é m e n t s t h a t w e r e t h e m o s t f o r m a i , m o s t useless, a n d m o s t o p p o s e d to t h e n e e d s of a n e q u a l i t a r i a n , p rogress ive d e m o c r a c y .

T h i s v iew of r h e t o r i c as d é c l a m a t i o n — o s t e n t a t i o n s a n d ar t i f ic ia l dis­course—is n o t a n e w o n e . T h e s a m e v iew was t a k e n of t h e r h e t o r i c of t h e R o m a n E m p i r e . O n c e se r ions m a t t e r s , b o t h p o l i t i c a l a n d j u d i c i a r y , h a d b e e n w i t h d r a w n f r o m i ts i n f l u e n c e , r h e t o r i c b e c a m e p e r f o r é e l i m i t e d t o schoo l exercises , t o set speeches t r e a t i n g e i t h e r a t h è m e of the pas t o r a n i m a g i n a r y s i t u a t i o n , b u t , i n a n y case, o n e w i t h o u t a n y r e a l b e a r i n g . Se r ions p e o p l e , e spec ia l ly t h e Stoics, m a d e f u n of i t . T h u s E p i c t e t u s dé­clares : " B u t th i s f a c u l t y of s p e a k i n g a n d of o r n a m e n t i n g words , if t h e r e is i n d e e d a n y s u c h p e c u l i a r f acu l ty , w h a t else does i t do , w h e n t h e r e h a p p e n s t o b e d i s cou r se a b o u t a t h i n g , t h a n to o r n a m e n t t h e words a n d a r r a n g e t h e m as h a i r d r e s s e r s d o t h e h a i r ? " *

A r i s t o t l e w o u l d h a v e d i s a g r e e d w i t h th i s c o n c e p t i o n of r h e t o r i c as a n o r n a m e n t a l a r t b e a r i n g t h e s a m e r e l a t i o n to p r o s e as poe t i c s does to verse. F o r Ar i s to t l e , r h e t o r i c is a p r a c t i c a l d i s c i p l i n e t h a t a ims , n o t a t p r o d u c i n g a w o r k of a r t , b u t a t e x e r t i n g t h r o u g h speech a p e r s u a s i v e ac t ion o n a n a u d i e n c e . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , h o w e v e r , t hose r e s p o n s i b l e fo r t h e c o n f u s i o n b e t w e e n t h e t w o h a v e b e e n a b l e t o a p p e a l t o Ar i s to t l e ' s o w n a u t h o r i t y b e c a u s e of t h e m i s l e a d i n g ana lys i s h e gave of t h e e p i d e i c t i c o r c é r é m o n i a l f o r m of o r a t o r y .

Discourses I I . 2 3 ; GBWW, V o l . 12, p p . 1 7 0 - 7 1 . 2 7 7

The New Rhetoric

I n h i s Rhetoric A r i s t o t l e d i s t i n g u i s h e s t h r e e g e n r e s of o r a t o r y : de l ib-e ra t ive , fo rens i c , a n d c é r é m o n i a l . " P o l i t i c a l s p e a k i n g , " h e wr i tes , " u r g e s u s e i t h e r t o d o o r n o t t o d o s o m e t h i n g : o n e of t hè se t w o courses is a lways t a k e n by p r i v a t e counse l lo r s , as wel l as b y m e n w h o a d d r e s s p u b l i c as­sembl ies . F o r e n s i c s p e a k i n g e i t h e r a t t a c k s o r d é f e n d s s o m e b o d y : o n e or o t h e r of t hè se t w o t h i n g s m u s t a lways b e d o n e b y t h e p a r t i e s i n a case. T h e c é r é m o n i a l o r a t o r y of d i sp l ay e i t h e r p ra i ses o r censu re s s o m e b o d y . " B u t w h e r e a s t h e a u d i e n c e is s u p p o s e d to ac t as a j u d g e a n d m a k e a déc is ion c o n c e r n i n g e i t h e r t h e f u t u r e (de l i be r a t i ve g e n r e ) o r t h e pas t ( forens ic gen re ) , i n t h e case of a n ep ide i c t i c d i scourse t h e task of t h e a u d i e n c e con-sists i n j u d g i n g , n o t a b o u t t he m a t t e r of d i scourse , b u t a b o u t t h e o r a t o r ' s ski l l .* I n p o l i t i c a l a n d fo r ens i c d i scourse t h e s u b j e c t of t h e d i scourse is itself u n d e r d i scuss ion , a n d t h e o r a t o r a i m s a t p e r s u a d i n g t h e a u d i e n c e t o t a k e p a r t i n d e c i d i n g t h e m a t t e r , b u t i n e p i d e i c t i c d i scour se t h e sub­jec t—such as, f o r e x a m p l e , t h e p ra i s e of so ld ie r s w h o h a v e d i e d fo r the i r count ry—is n o t a t a i l a m a t t e r of d e b a t e . Such set speeches were o f t e n d e l i v e r e d b e f o r e l a r g e assembl ies , as a t the O l y m p i c G a m e s , w h e r e com­pétition between orators provided a welcome complément to the athletic contes ts . O n s u c h occas ions , t h e o n l y déc i s ion t h a t t h e a u d i e n c e was ca l led u p o n to m a k e c o n c e r n e d t h e t a l e n t of t h e o r a t o r , by a w a r d i n g t h e c r o w n to the Victor.

O n e m i g h t we l l ask h o w a n o r a t o r i c a l g e n r e c a n b e d e f i n e d by its l i ter-a ry i m i t a t i o n . W e k n o w t h a t Cicero , a f t e r h a v i n g lost t h e sui t , r e w r o t e h i s Pro Milone a n d p u b l i s h e d i t as a l i t e r a ry w o r k . H e h o p e d t h a t by a r t i s t i ca l ly i m p r o v i n g t h e speech, w h i c h h a d f a i l e d t o c o n v i n c e Mi lo ' s j u d g e s , h e m i g h t g a i n t h e a p p r o b a t i o n of lovers of l i t e r a t u r e . A r e those w h o r e a d th i s speech l o n g a f t e r i ts p r a c t i c a l b e a r i n g h a s d i s a p p e a r e d any m o r e t h a n spec ta to r s? I n t h a t case, ai l d i s cour ses a u t o m a t i c a l l y b e c o m e l i t e r a t u r e o n c e t h e y cease t o e x e r t a p e r s u a s i v e ef îect , a n d t h e r e is n o p a r t i c u l a r r e a s o n to d i s t i n g u i s h d i f f é r e n t g e n r e s of o r a t o r y . Yet i t can b e m a i n t a i n e d , o n t h e c o n t r a r y , t h a t t he e p i d e i c t i c g e n r e is n o t on ly im­p o r t a n t b u t e s sen t i a l f r o m a n e d u c a t i o n a l p o i n t of v iew, s ince i t t oo h a s a n ef fec t ive a n d d i s t i n c t i v e p a r t to p lay—tha t , n a m e l y , of b r i n g i n g a b o u t a c o n s e n s u s i n t h e m i n d s of t h e a u d i e n c e r e g a r d i n g t h e v a l u e s t h a t a re c é l é b r a t e d i n t h e speech .

T h e m o r a l i s t s r i g h t l y sa t i r ize t h e v iew of e p i d e i c t i c o r a t o r y as spectacle . L a B r u y è r e w r i t e s de r i s ive ly of those w h o " a r e so d e e p l y m o v e d a n d t o u c h e d by T h e o d o r u s ' s s e r m o n t h a t t hey réso lve i n t h e i r h e a r t s t h a t i t is e v e n m o r e b e a u t i f u l t h a n t h e last o n e h e p r e a c h e d . " A n d Bossuet , f e a r f u l lest t h e r e a l p o i n t of a s e r m o n b e missed , e x c l a i m s : " Y o u s h o u l d n o w b e c o n v i n c e d t h a t p r e a c h e r s of t h e G o s p e l d o n o t a s c e n d i n t o p u l p i t s t o u t t e r e m p t y speeches to b e l i s t ened to f o r a m u s e m e n t . " ^

Bossue t h e r e is f o l l o w i n g St. A u g u s t i n e ' s p r e c e p t s c o n c e r n i n g sacred 278 d i s cou r se as set f o r t h i n t h e f o u r t h b o o k of h i s w o r k On Christian Doc-

Chaim Perelman

trine. T h e o r a t o r is n o t c o n t e n t if h i s h s t e n e r m e r e l y accepts t he t r u t h of h is w o r d s a n d p ra i s e s h i s é l o q u e n c e , b e c a u s e h e w a n t s h i s fu l l assen t :

// the truths taught are such that to believe or to hnow them is enoiigh, to give one's assent implies nothing more than to confess that they are true. When, however, the truth taught is one that must be carried into practice, and that is taught for the very pur-pose of being practised, it is useless to be persuaded of the truth of what is said, it is useless to be pleased with the manner in which it is said, if it be not so learnt as to be practised. The éloquent divine, then, when he is urging a practical truth, must not only teach so as to give instruction, and please so as to keep up the attention, but he must also sway the mind so as to subdue the will.

T h e l i s t ene r wi l l b e p e r s u a d e d , A u g u s t i n e a lso c l a i m s ,

if he be drawn by your promises, and awed by your threats; if he reject what you condemn, and embrace what you commend; if he grieve when you heap up objects for grief, and rejoice when you point out an object for joy; if he pity those whom you présent to him as objects of pity, and shrink from those whom you set before him as men to be feared and shunned.\

T h e o r a t o r ' s a i m i n t h e e p i d e i c t i c g e n r e is n o t j u s t t o g a i n a passive a d h é r e n c e f r o m h i s a u d i e n c e b u t to p r o v o k e t h e a c t i o n w i s h e d for or , a t least , t o a w a k e n a d i s p o s i t i o n so to act . T h i s is a c h i e v e d b y f o r m i n g a c o m m u n i t y of m i n d s , w h i c h K e n n e t h B u r k e , w h o is we l l a w a r e of t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h i s g e n r e , calls identification. As h e wr i t es , r h e t o r i c " is r o o t e d in a n essen t i a l f u n c t i o n of l a n g u a g e i tself , a f u n c t i o n t h a t is who l ly rea l i s t i c a n d is c o n t i n u a l l y b o r n a n e w ; t h e use of l a n g u a g e as a symbol ic m e a n s of i n d u c i n g c o o p é r a t i o n i n b e i n g s t h a t by n a t u r e r e s p o n d to sym-bols."'<* I n fac t , a n y p e r s u a s i v e d i scour se seeks t o h a v e a n efifect o n a n a u d i e n c e , a l t h o u g h t h e a u d i e n c e m a y consis t of o n l y o n e p e r s o n a n d t h e d i scourse b e a n i n w a r d d é l i b é r a t i o n .

T h e d i s t i n c t i o n of t h e d i f f é r e n t g e n r e s of o r a t o r y is h i g h l y ar t i f ic ial , as t h e s t u d y of a s p e e c h shows. M a r k A n t o n y ' s f a m o u s speech i n Shake-spea re ' s Julius Caesar\ o p e n s w i t h a f u n e r a l eu logy , a t yp ica l case of ep ide i c t i c d i scourse , a n d e n d s by p r o v o k i n g a r i o t t h a t is c lear ly pol i t i ca l . I t s goa l is t o i n t e n s i f y a n a d h é r e n c e to va lues , t o c r e a t e a d i spos i t i on t o act , a n d f ina l ly t o b r i n g p e o p l e t o ac t . Seen i n s u c h p e r s p e c t i v e , r h e t o r i c b e c o m e s a s u b j e c t of g r e a t p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n t e r e s t .

• Rhetoric I. 1 3 5 8 b 1 - 1 3 ; GBWW, V o l . 9 , p . 598 . f On Christian Doctrine I V . 13, 12; GBWW, V o l . 18, p . 6 8 4 . t A c t I I I , s c è n e i i ; GBWW, V o l . 2 6 , p p . 5 8 4 c ff . 2 7 9

The New Rhetoric

Thinking about values

I n 1945, w h e n I p u b l i s h e d m y first s t u d y of j u s t i c e , " I was c o m p l e t e l y i g n o r a n t of t h e i m p o r t a n c e of r h e t o r i c . T h i s s tudy , u n d e r t a k e n in t h e sp i r i t of logica l e m p i r i c i s m , succeeded in s h o w i n g t h a t formai justice is a p r i n c i p l e of a c t i o n , a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h b e i n g s of o n e a n d the s ame es-sen t i a l ca t ego ry m u s t b e t r e a t e d i n t h e s a m e way.^^ T h e a p p l i c a t i o n of th is p r i n c i p l e t o a c t u a l s i t ua t ions , h o w e v e r , r e q u i r e s c r i t e r i a t o i n d i c a t e w h i c h ca t égor i e s a r e r e l e v a n t a n d h o w t h e i r m e m b e r s s h o u l d b e t r e a t e d , a n d s u c h déc i s ions i n v o l v e a r e c o u r s e to j u d g m e n t s of va lue . B u t o n pos i t iv i s t i c m e t h o d s I c o u l d n o t see h o w such j u d g m e n t s c o u l d h a v e a n y f o u n d a t i o n o r j u s t i f i c a t i o n . I n d e e d , as I e n t i r e l y a c c e p t e d t h e p r i n c i p l e t h a t o n e c a n n o t d r a w a n " o u g h t " f r o m a n "is"—a j u d g m e n t of v a l u e f r o m a j u d g m e n t of fact—I was led i n e v i t a b l y to t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t if j u s t i ce consis ts i n t h e sys t emat i c i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of c e r t a i n v a l u e j u d g ­m e n t s , i t does n o t r e s t o n a n y r a t i o n a l f o u n d a t i o n : " A s f o r t h e v a l u e t h a t is t h e f o u n d a t i o n of t h e n o r m a t i v e System, we c a n n o t s u b j e c t i t to a n y r a t i o n a l c r i t e r i o n : i t is u t t e r l y a r b i t r a r y a n d logica l ly i n d e t e r m i n a t e . . . . T h e i dea of v a l u e is, i n ef îect , i n c o m p a t i b l e b o t h w i t h f o r m a i necessi ty a n d w i t h e x p e r i e n t i a l un ive r sa l i t y . T h e r e is n o v a l u e w h i c h is n o t logical ly a r b i t r a r y . "

I w a s d e e p l y d i ssa t i s f i ed w i t h th i s c o n c l u s i o n , h o w e v e r i n t e r e s t i n g t h e analysis , s ince t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n q u i r y , c a r r i e d o n w i t h i n t h e l imi t s of log ica l e m p i r i c i s m , c o u l d n o t p r o v i d e a n i d é a l of p r a c t i c a l r eason , t h a t is, t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of r u l e s a n d m o d e l s fo r r e a s o n a b l e a c t i o n . By ad-m i t t i n g t h e s o u n d n e s s of H u m e ' s analys is , I f o u n d myself i n a s i t u a t i o n s i m i l a r t o K a n t ' s . If H u m e is r i g h t i n m a i n t a i n i n g t h a t e m p i r i c i s m c a n n o t p r o v i d e a bas i s f o r e i t h e r sc ience o r m o r a l s , m u s t we n o t t h e n look to o t h e r t h a n e m p i r i c a l m e t h o d s to j u s t i f y t h e m ? S imi l a r l y , if e x p é r i e n c e a n d c a l c u l a t i o n , c o m b i n é e ! a c c o r d i n g to t h e p r e c e p t s of log ica l e m p i r i c i s m , l eave n o p l a c e f o r p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n a n d d o n o t e n a b l e us to j u s t i f y o u r déc i s ions a n d choices , m u s t we n o t seek o t h e r t e c h n i q u e s of r e a s o n i n g fo r t h a t p u r p o s e ? I n o t h e r words , is t h e r e a log ic of v a l u e j u d g m e n t s t h a t m a k e s i t pos s ib l e f o r us to r e a s o n a b o u t v a l u e s i n s t e a d of m a k i n g t h e m dé­p e n d solely o n i r r a t i o n a l choices , b a s e d o n i n t e r e s t , pa s s ion , p r é j u d i c e , a n d m y t h ? R é c e n t h i s t o r y h a s s h o w n a b u n d a n t l y t h e sad excesses to w h i c h s u c h a n a t t i t u d e c a n l ead .

C r i t i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l l i t e r a t u r e y i e lded n o sat-i s f ac to ry r e su l t s . T h e F r e n c h log ic ian E d m o n d G o b l o t , i n h i s w o r k La logique des jugements de valeur,^* r e s t r i c t e d h i s ana lys i s to d e r i v e d o r i n s t r u m e n t a l v a l u e j u d g m e n t s , t h a t is, to t hose j u d g m e n t s t h a t use v a l u e s as a m e a n s t o a l r e a d y a c c e p t e d ends , o r as obs t ac l e s t o t h e i r a t t a i n m e n t . T h e e n d s themse lves , h o w e v e r , c o u l d n o t b e s u b j e c t e d t o d é l i b é r a t i o n un l e s s t h e y w e r e t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o i n s t r u m e n t a l va lues , b u t such a t rans-

280 f o r m a t i o n o n l y p u s h e s f u r t h e r b a c k t h e p r o b l e m of u l t i m a t e ends .

Chaim Perelman

W e t h u s seem to b e f a c e d w i t h t w o e x t r ê m e a t t i t u d e s , n e i t h e r of w h i c h is a c c e p t a b l e : s u b j e c t i v i s m , w h i c h , as f a r as va lues a r e c o n c e r n e d , l eads to skep t i c i sm fo r lack of a n i n t e r s u b j e c t i v e c r i t e r i o n ; or a n a b s o l u t i s m f o u n d e d o n i n t u i t i o n i s m . I n t h e l a t t e r case, j u d g m e n t s of v a l u e a re as-s i m i l a t e d to j u d g m e n t s of a r e a l i t y t h a t is siii generis. I n o t h e r words , m u s t we choose b e t w e e n A. J . A y e r ' s v iew in Language, Truth, and Logic a n d G . E. M o o r e ' s v iew in Principia Ethica} B o t h seem to give a d i s t o r t e d n o t i o n of t h e a c t u a l p rocess of d é l i b é r a t i o n t h a t l eads t o déc i s ion m a k i n g i n p r a c t i c a l f ie lds such as po l i t i c s , law, a n d m o r a l s .

T h e n too, I a g r e e d w i t h t h e c r i t i c i sms m a d e by v a r i o u s types of exis-t e n t i a l i s m a g a i n s t b o t h pos i t iv i s t e m p i r i c i s m a n d r a t i o n a l i s t i c idea l i sm, b u t I c o u l d find n o sa t i s f ac t ion i n t h e i r j u s t i f i c a t i on of a c t i o n by p u r e l y s u b j e c t i v e p r o j e c t s o r c o m m i t m e n t s .

I c o u l d see b u t o n e w a y to so lve t h e d i l e m m a t o w h i c h m o s t c u r r e n t s of c o n t e m p o r a r y p h i l o s o p h y h a d led . I n s t e a d of w o r k i n g o u t a priori poss ib le s t r u c t u r e s f o r a logic of v a l u e j u d g m e n t s , m i g h t we n o t d o b e t t e r t o f o l l o w t h e m e t h o d a d o p t e d b y t h e G e r m a n log ic i an G o t t l o b Frege , w h o , to cast n e w l i gh t o n logic, d e c i d e d to ana lyze t h e r e a s o n i n g used b y m a t h e m a t i c i a n s ? C o u l d w e n o t u n d e r t a k e , i n t h e s a m e way, a n e x t e n s i v e i n q u i r y i n t o t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e m o s t d iverse a u t h o r s i n a i l fields d o in f a c t r e a s o n a b o u t va lues? By a n a l y z i n g po l i t i ca l d i scourse , t he r ea -sons g i v e n by j u d g e s , t h e r e a s o n i n g of mora l i s t s , t h e d a i l y d i scuss ions car-r i e d o n in d e l i b e r a t i n g a b o u t m a k i n g a cho ice or r e a c h i n g a déc i s ion o r n o m i n a t i n g a p e r s o n , we m i g h t b e a b l e t o t r ace t h e a c t u a l log ic of v a l u e j u d g m e n t s w h i c h seems c o n t i n u a l l y t o é l u d e t h e g r a s p of specia l is ts i n t h e t h e o r y of k n o w l e d g e .

F o r a l m o s t t en years M m e L. O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a a n d I c o n d u c t e d s u c h a n i n q u i r y a n d analys is . W e o b t a i n e d r e su l t s t h a t n e i t h e r of u s h a d eve r e x p e c t e d . W i t h o u t e i t h e r k n o w i n g o r w i s h i n g it , we h a d r ed i s cove red a p a r t of A r i s t o t e l i a n logic t h a t h a d b e e n l o n g f o r g o t t e n or , a t a n y r a t e , i g n o r e d a n d desp i sed . I t was t h e p a r t d e a l i n g w i t h d ia lec t i ca l r e a s o n i n g , as d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m d é m o n s t r a t i v e r eason ing—cal l ed by Ar i s t o t l e ana-lytics—which is a n a l y z e d a t l e n g t h i n t h e Rhetoric, Topics, a n d On Sophis-tical Réfutations. W e ca l l ed t h i s n e w , o r r ev ived , b r a n c h of s tudy , de-v o t e d t o t h e ana lys i s of i n f o r m a i r e a s o n i n g , The New Rhetoric.^^

Argumentation and démonstration

T h e n e w r h e t o r i c is a t h e o r y of a r g u m e n t a t i o n . B u t t h e spécifie p a r t t h a t is p l a y e d by a r g u m e n t a t i o n c o u l d n o t b e f u l l y u n d e r s t o o d u n t i l t h e m o d e m t h e o r y of d é m o n s t r a t i o n — t o w h i c h i t is c o m p l e m e n t a r y — h a d b e e n d e v e l o p e d . I n its c o n t e m p o r a r y f o r m , d é m o n s t r a t i o n is a c a l c u l a t i o n m a d e i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h r u l e s t h a t h a v e b e e n l a id d o w n b e f o r e h a n d . N o r e c o u r s e is a l l o w e d to é v i d e n c e o r t o a n y i n t u i t i o n o t h e r t h a n t h a t of t h e

The New Rhetoric

sensés. T h e o n l y r e q u i r e m e n t is t h e ab i l i t y to d i s t i n g u i s h signs a n d to p e r f o r m o p é r a t i o n s a c c o r d i n g to ru les . A d é m o n s t r a t i o n is r e g a r d e d as c o r r e c t o r i n c o r r e c t a c c o r d i n g as i t c o n f o r m s , or fa i l s t o c o n f o r m , to t h e r u l e s . A c o n c l u s i o n is h e l d t o be d e m o n s t r a t e d if i t c a n b e r e a c h e d by m e a n s of a sér ies of co r r ec t o p é r a t i o n s s t a r t i n g f r o m p r e m i s e s a c c e p t e d as a x i o m s . W h e t h e r thèse a x i o m s b e c o n s i d e r e d as é v i d e n t , necessary, t rue , o r h y p o t h e t i c a l , t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m a n d t h e d e m o n s t r a t e d the-o r e m s r e m a i n s u n c h a n g e d . T o pass f r o m a co r r ec t i n f e r e n c e t o t h e t r u t h o r t o t h e c o m p u t a b l e p r o b a b i l i t y of t h e conc lu s i o n , o n e m u s t a d m i t b o t h t h e t r u t h of t h e p r e m i s e s a n d t h e c o h é r e n c e of t h e a x i o m a t i c System.

T h e a c c e p t a n c e of thèse a s s u m p t i o n s c o m p e l s us t o a b a n d o n p u r e f o r m a l i s m a n d to accep t c e r t a i n c o n v e n t i o n s a n d to a d m i t t h e rea l i ty of c e r t a i n m o d e l s o r s t r u c t u r e s . A c c o r d i n g to t h e classical t h e o r y of d é m o n ­s t r a t i o n , w h i c h is r e j e c t e d by f o r m a l i s m , t h e va l id i ty of t h e d e d u c t i v e m e t h o d was g u a r a n t e e d by i n t u i t i o n or év idence—by t h e n a t u r a l l i gh t of r e a s o n . B u t if we r e j e c t s u c h a f o u n d a t i o n , we a r e n o t c o m p e l l e d to ac­c e p t f o r m a l i s m . I t is s t i l l insuf f ic ien t , s ince we n e e d g o o d r e a s o n s to ac­c e p t t h e p r e m i s e s f r o m w h i c h w e s ta r t , a n d thèse r e a s o n s c a n b e g o o d o n l y f o r a m i n d c a p a b l e of j u d g i n g t h e m . H o w e v e r , o n c e we h a v e accep ted t h e f r a m e w o r k of a f o r m a i System a n d k n o w t h a t i t is f r ee f r o m a m b i g u i t y , t h e n t h e d é m o n s t r a t i o n s t h a t can b e m a d e w i t h i n i t a r e c o m p e l l i n g a n d i m p e r s o n a l ; i n fac t , t h e i r v a l i d i t y is c a p a b l e of b e i n g c o n t r o l l e d m e c h a n -ica l ly . I t is th i s spécifie c h a r a c t e r of f o r m a i d é m o n s t r a t i o n t h a t d is t in-g u i s h e s it f r o m d ia l ec t i ca l r e a s o n i n g f o u n d e d o n o p i n i o n a n d c o n c e r n e d w i t h c o n t i n g e n t rea l i t i es . R a m u s f a i l e d t o see th i s d i s t i n c t i o n a n d con-f u s e d t h e t w o by u s i n g a f a u l t y a n a l o g y w i t h t h e s igh t of m o v i n g a n d u n m o v i n g colors.^^ I t is s o m e t i m e s poss ib le , by r e s o r t i n g t o p r i o r a r r a n g e ­m e n t s a n d c o n v e n t i o n s , t o t r a n s f o r m a n a r g u m e n t i n t o a d é m o n s t r a t i o n of a m o r e o r less p r o b a b i l i s t i c c h a r a c t e r . I t r e m a i n s t r u e , n o n e t h e l e s s , t h a t w e m u s t d i s t i n g u i s h c a r e f u l l y b e t w e e n t h e t w o types of r e a s o n i n g if we w a n t to u n d e r s t a n d p r o p e r l y h o w t h e y a r e r e l a t e d .

A n a r g u m e n t a t i o n is a lways a d d r e s s e d b y a p e r s o n ca l l ed t h e ora tor— w h e t h e r by speech o r in w r i t i n g — t o a n a u d i e n c e of l i s t eners o r r eade r s . I t a i m s a t o b t a i n i n g o r r e i n f o r c i n g t h e a d h é r e n c e of t h e a u d i e n c e t o some thes is , assen t to w h i c h is h o p e d fo r . T h e n e w r h e t o r i c , l ike t h e o ld , seeks t o p e r s u a d e o r conv ince , t o o b t a i n a n a d h é r e n c e w h i c h m a y b e theoretical t o s t a r t w i t h , a l t h o u g h i t m a y e v e n t u a l l y b e m a n i f e s t e d t h r o u g h a dis­p o s i t i o n t o act , o r practical, as p r o v o k i n g e i t h e r i m m é d i a t e ac t i on , t h e m a k i n g of a déc i s ion , o r a c o m m i t m e n t t o act .

T h u s a r g u m e n t a t i o n , u n l i k e d é m o n s t r a t i o n , p r é s u p p o s e s a m e e t i n g of m i n d s : t h e wi l l o n t h e p a r t of t h e o r a t o r to p e r s u a d e a n d n o t t o com-p e l o r c o m m a n d , a n d a d i s p o s i t i o n o n t h e p a r t of t h e a u d i e n c e t o l i s ten. S u c h m u t u a l g o o d w i l l m u s t n o t o n l y b e g ê n e r a i b u t m u s t a l so a p p l y to t h e p a r t i c u l a r q u e s t i o n a t issue; i t m u s t n o t b e f o r g o t t e n t h a t a i l a rgu-

282 m e n t a t i o n a i m s s o m e h o w a t m o d i f y i n g a n e x i s t i n g s t a t e of a f îa i r s . T h i s

Chaim Perelman

is w h y every society possesses i n s t i t u t i o n s t o f u r t h e r d i scuss ion b e t w e e n c o m p é t e n t p e r s o n s a n d to p r e v e n t o the r s . N o t e v e r y b o d y c a n s t a r t de-b a t i n g a b o u t a n y t h i n g w h a t e v e r , n o m a t t e r w h e r e . T o b e a m a n p e o p l e Hsten t o is a p r e c i o u s q u a h t y a n d is sti l l m o r e necessary as a p r e h m i n a r y c o n d i t i o n for a n eff icacious a r g u m e n t a t i o n .

I n some cases t h e r e a r e d e t a i l e d r u l e s d r a w n u p f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g th i s c o n t a c t b e f o r e a q u e s t i o n c a n b e d e b a t e d . T h e m a i n p u r p o s e of p rocé ­d u r e in civil a n d c r i m i n a l l a w is to e n s u r e a b a l a n c e d u n f o l d i n g of t h e j u d i c i a l d e b a t e . E v e n i n m a t t e r s w h e r e t h e r e a r e n o e x p l i c i t r u l e s f o r d iscuss ion , t h e r e a r e st i l l c u s t o m s a n d h a b i t s t h a t c a n n o t b e d i s r e g a r d e d w i t h o u t suf ï ic ient r e a s o n .

A r g u m e n t a t i o n also p r é s u p p o s e s a m e a n s of c o m m u n i c a t i n g , a com-m o n l a n g u a g e . T h e use of i t i n a g iven s i t u a t i o n , h o w e v e r , m a y a d m i t of v a r i a t i o n a c c o r d i n g to t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e i n t e r l o c u t o r s . S o m e t i m e s o n l y c e r t a i n p e r s o n s a r e e n t i t l e d t o ask q u e s t i o n s or t o c o n d u c t t h e d e b a t e .

F r o m thèse spéc i f i ca t ions i t is a p p a r e n t t h a t t he n e w r h e t o r i c c a n n o t t o l e r a t e t h e m o r e o r less c o n v e n t i o n a l , a n d even a r b i t r a r y , l i m i t a t i o n s t r a d i t i o n a l l y i m p o s e d u p o n class ical r h e t o r i c . Fo r Ar i s to t l e , t h e s imi la r i ty b e t w e e n r h e t o r i c a n d d i a l e c t i c was a l l - i m p o r t a n t . * A c c o r d i n g to h i m , t i iey d i f ï e r o n l y i n t h a t d i a l e c t i c p r o v i d e s us w i t h t e c h n i q u e s of d iscuss ion f o r a c o m m o n sea rch f o r t r u t h , w h i l e r h e t o r i c t eaches h o w to c o n d u c t a de­b a t e in w h i c h v a r i o u s p o i n t s of v i e w a r e expressed a n d t h e déc i s ion is l e f t u p to t h e a u d i e n c e . T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n shows w h y d i a l ec t i c h a s b e e n t r a d i ­t i ona l l y c o n s i d e r e d as a s e r ions m a t t e r b y p h i l o s o p h e r s , w h e r e a s r h e t o r i c h a s b e e n r e g a r d e d w i t h c o n t e m p t . T r u t h , i t was h e l d , p r e s i d e d over a d i a l ec t i ca l d i scuss ion , a n d t h e i n t e r l o c u t o r s h a d to r e a c h a g r e e m e n t a b o u t i t by themselves , w h e r e a s r h e t o r i c t a u g h t o n l y h o w to p r é s e n t a p o i n t of v iew—tha t is t o say, a p a r t i a l a s p e c t of t h e q u e s t i o n — a n d t h e déc i s ion of t h e issue was l e f t u p t o a t h i r d p e r s o n . f

I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d , h o w e v e r , t h a t fo r P l a t o d ia l ec t i c a l o n e d o e s n o t a t -t a i n to m e t a p h y s i c a l t r u t h . T h e l a t t e r r e q u i r e s a n i n t u i t i o n f o r w h i c h d i a l ec t i c c a n o n l y p a v e t h e w a y b y e l i m i n a t i n g u n t e n a b l e hypo thèse s , f H o w e v e r , t r u t h is t h e k e y n o t e f o r d ia lec t ic , w h i c h seeks t o ge t as close t o t h e t r u t h as poss ib le t h r o u g h t h e d i scurs ive m e t h o d . T h e r h e t o r i c i a n , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , is d e s c r i b e d as t r y i n g to o u t d o h i s r iva i s i n d e b a t e , a n d , if h i s j u d g e s a r e gross a n d i g n o r a n t , t h e t r i u m p h of t h e o r a t o r w h o shows t h e g rea t e s t ski l l i n f l a t t e ry wi l l by n o m e a n s a lways b e t h e v ic tory of t h e bes t cause . P l a t o e m p h a s i z e s th i s p o i n t s t rong ly i n t h e Gorgias, w h e r e h e shows t h a t t h e d é m a g o g u e , t o ach ieve vic tory , w i l l n o t hes i t a t e t o u s e t e c h n i q u e s u n w o r t h y of a p h i l o s o p h e r . T h i s c r i t i c i sm g a i n s jus t i -

• S e e Rhetoric I . 1 3 5 4 a 1 - 6 , 1 3 5 5 a 3 5 - 3 7 , 1 3 5 5 b 8 - 1 0 , 1356a 3 0 - 3 5 , 1 3 5 6 b 3 5 , 1 3 5 6 b 3 7 - 3 8 ; GBWW, V o l . 9 , p p . 5 9 3 - 9 6 .

t P l a t o , Republic I. 3 4 8 a - b ; GBWW, V o l . 7 , p . 3 0 6 . I Republic 5 1 1 ; GBWW, V o l . 7 , p . 3 8 7 . Seventh Letter 3 4 4 b ; GBWW, V o l . 7 , p . 8 1 0 . 2 8 3

The New Rhetoric

fication f r o m Ar i s to t l e ' s o b s e r v a t i o n , b a s e d e v i d e n t l y o n A t h e n i a n prac-tice, t h a t i t b e l o n g s t o r h e t o r i c " t o d e a l w i t h s u c h m a t t e r s as we d e l i b e r a t e u p o n w i t h o u t a r t s o r Systems to g u i d e us, i n t h e h e a r i n g of p e r s o n s w h o c a n n o t t a k e i n a t a g l a n c e a c o m p H c a t e d a r g u m e n t , o r foUow a l o n g c h a i n of r e a s o n i n g . " *

F o r t h e n e w r h e t o r i c , h o w e v e r , a r g u m e n t a t i o n h a s a w i d e r scope as n o n f o r m a l r e a s o n i n g t h a t a i m s a t o b t a i n i n g o r r e i n f o r c i n g t h e a d h é r e n c e of a n a u d i e n c e . I t is m a n i f e s t i n d i scuss ion as we l l as i n d e b a t e , a n d i t m a t t e r s n o t w h e t h e r t h e a i m b e t h e sea rch f o r t r u t h o r t h e t r i u m p h of a cause , a n d t h e a u d i e n c e m a y h a v e a n y d e g r e e of c o m p é t e n c e . T h e rea-son t h a t r h e t o r i c h a s b e e n d e e m e d u n w o r t h y of t h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s e f for t s is n o t b e c a u s e d i a l ec t i c e m p l o y s a t e c h n i q u e of q u e s t i o n s a n d answers w h i l e r h e t o r i c p r o c e e d s by speeches f r o m o p p o s i n g sides.f I t is n o t th i s b u t r a t h e r t h e i d e a of t h e u n i c i t y of t r u t h t h a t h a s d i s q u a l i f i e d r h e t o r i c i n t h e W e s t e r n p h i l o s o p h i c a l t r a d i t i o n . T h u s Desca r t e s déc la res : " W h e n -ever t w o m e n c o m e to o p p o s i t e déc i s ions a b o u t t h e s a m e m a t t e r o n e of t h e m a t leas t m u s t c e r t a i n l y b e i n t h e w r o n g , a n d a p p a r e n t l y t h e r e is n o t e v e n o n e of t h e m w h o k n o w s ; f o r if t h e r e a s o n i n g of t h e second was S o u n d a n d c lea r h e w o u l d b e a b l e so t o lay i t b e f o r e t h e o t h e r as f ina l ly t o s u c c e e d i n c o n v i n c i n g his u n d e r s t a n d i n g a l s o . " } B o t h Desca r t e s a n d P l a t o h o l d th i s i d e a b e c a u s e of t h e i r r e j e c t i o n of o p i n i o n , w h i c h is var i ­ab l e , a n d t h e i r a d o p t i o n of a n i d é a l of sc ience b a s e d o n t h e m o d e l of g e o m e t r y a n d m a t h e m a t i c a l r e a s o n i n g — t h e very m o d e l a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h t h e w o r l d was s u p p o s e d to h a v e b e e n c r e a t e d . Dum Deus calculât, fit mundus [ W h i l e G o d ca lculâ tes , t h e w o r l d is c r e a t e d ] is t h e conv i c t i on n o t o n l y of L e i b n i z b u t of ai l r a t i o n a l i s t s .

T h i n g s a r e very d i f f é r e n t w i t h i n a t r a d i t i o n t h a t fo l lows a j u r i d i c a l , r a t h e r t h a n a m a t h e m a t i c a l , m o d e l . T h u s i n t h e t r a d i t i o n of t h e T a l m u d , f o r e x a m p l e , i t is a c c e p t e d t h a t o p p o s e d p o s i t i o n s c a n b e e q u a l l y rea-s o n a b l e ; o n e of t h e m does n o t h a v e t o b e r i g h t . I n d e e d , " i n t h e T a l m u d t w o schools of b i b l i c a l i n t e r p r é t a t i o n a r e i n c o n s t a n t o p p o s i t i o n , t h e s choo l of H i l l e l a n d t h a t of S h a m m a i . R a b b i A b b a r e l a t e s t h a t , b o t h e r e d b y t hè se c o n t r a d i c t o r y i n t e r p r é t a t i o n s of t h e sac red t ex t , R a b b i S a m u e l add re s se s h imse l f t o h e a v e n i n o r d e r t o k n o w w h o speaks t h e t r u t h . A vo i ce f r o m a b o v e answer s h i m t h a t t hè se t w o thèses b o t h exp re s sed t h e Word of t h e L i v i n g G o d . ' ' ^ '

S o too , f o r P l a t o , t h e s u b j e c t of d i scuss ion is a lways o n e f o r w h i c h m e n possess n o t e c h n i q u e s f o r r e a c h i n g a g r e e m e n t i m m e d i a t e l y :

Suppose for example that you and I , my good friend [Socrates re­marks to Euthyphro], differ about a number; do différences of this sort make us enemies and set us at variance with one another? Do we not go at once to arithmetic, and put an end to them by a

284 sum? . . . Or suppose that we differ about magnitudes, do we not

Chaim Perelman

quickly end the différences by measuring? . . . And we end a con-troversy abolit heavy and light by resorting to a weighing machine? . . . But what différences are there which cannot be thus decided, and which therefore make us angry and set us at enmity with one another? I dare say the answer does not occur to you at the moment, and therefore I will suggest that thèse enmities arise when the matters of différence are the just and unjust, good and evil, honour-able and dishonourable.^

W h e n a g r e e m e n t can easi ly b e r e a c h e d by m e a n s of c a l c u l a t i o n , m e a ­s u r i n g , o r we igh ing , w h e n a r e s u i t c a n b e e i t h e r d e m o n s t r a t e d o r ve r i f i ed , n o b o d y w o u l d t h i n k of r e s o r t i n g t o d ia lec t i ca l d i scuss ion . T h e l a t t e r c o n c e r n s o n l y w h a t c a n n o t b e so d e c i d e d a n d , especial ly, d i s a g r e e m e n t s a b o u t va lues . I n fac t , in m a t t e r s of o p i n i o n , i t is o f t e n t h e case t h a t n e i t h e r r h e t o r i c n o r d i a l ec t i c c a n r e c o n c i l e a i l t h e pos i t ions t h a t a r e t a k e n .

S u c h is exac t ly h o w m a t t e r s s t a n d i n p h i l o s o p h y . T h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s a p p e a l to r e a s o n gives n o g u a r a n t e e w h a t e v e r t h a t e v e r y o n e wi l l a g r é e w i t h h i s p o i n t of view. D i f f é r e n t p h i l o s o p h i e s p r é s e n t d i f f é r e n t p o i n t s of v iew, a n d i t is s ign i f i can t t h a t a h i s t o r i a n of pre-Socra t ic p h i l o s o p h y h a s b e e n a b l e to s h o w t h a t t h e d i f f é r e n t p o i n t s of view can b e r e g a r d e d as a n t i l o g i e s o r d i scourses o n o p p o s i t e sides, in t h a t a n a n t i t h e s i s is o p p o s e d i n e a c h case t o a thesis.i** O n e m i g h t e v e n w o n d e r w i t h A l e x a n d r e K o j è v e , t h e l a t e e x p e r t i n H e g e l i a n p h i l o s o p h y , w h e t h e r H e g e l i a n d i a l e c t i c d i d n o t h a v e its o r ig in , n o t in P l a t o n i c d i a l e c t i c , b u t r a t h e r in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of p h i l o s o p h i c a l Systems t h a t c a n b e o p p o s e d as thesis to an t i t hes i s , f o l l o w e d b y a syn thes i s of t h e two. T h e p r o c e s s is s i m i l a r to a l awsu i t i n w h i c h t h e j u d g e iden t i f i e s t h e é l é m e n t s h e r e g a r d s as v a l i d in t h e c l a ims of t h e op­p o s e d pa r t i e s . F o r K a n t as we l l as f o r H e g e l , o p i n i o n s a r e s u p p o s e d t o b e e x c l u d e d f r o m p h i l o s o p h y , w h i c h a i m s a t r a t i o n a l i t y . B u t to e x p l a i n t h e d i v e r g e n c i e s t h a t a r e sys t emat i ca l ly e n c o u n t e r e d in t he h i s to ry of ph i loso­p h y , w e n e e d o n l y call t hèse o p i n i o n s t h e n a t u r a l i l lus ions of r e a s o n as s u b m i t t e d t o t h e t r i b u n a l of c r i t i c a l r e a s o n (as in K a n t ) o r successive m o m e n t s in t h e p rog res s of r e a s o n t o w a r d A b s o l u t e Sp i r i t (as i n H e g e l ) .

T o r e c o n c i l e p h i l o s o p h i e c l a i m s t o r a t i o n a l i t y w i t h t h e p l u r a l i t y of p h i l o s o p h i e Systems, we m u s t r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e a p p e a l t o r e a s o n m u s t b e i d e n t i f i e d n o t as a n a p p e a l t o a s ing l e t r u t h b u t i n s t e a d as a n a p p e a l f o r t h e a d h é r e n c e of a n a u d i e n c e , w h i c h c a n b e t h o u g h t of, a f t e r t h e m a n -n e r of K a n t ' s ca t ego r i ca l i m p e r a t i v e , as e n c o m p a s s i n g a i l r e a s o n a b l e a n d

• Rhetoric I. 1 3 5 7 a 1 ^ ; GBWW, V o l . 9 , p . 5 9 6 . i P l a t o , Cratylus 3 9 0 c ; GBWW, V o l . 7 , p p . 8 8 - 8 9 . Theaelelus 167cl; GBWW, V o l . 7 ,

p . 5 2 6 . X Rules for the Direction of the Mind; GBWW, V o l . 31 , p . 2. { Euthyphro 7; GBWW, V o l . 7 , p p . 1 9 3 - 9 4 . 2 8 5

The New Rhetoric

c o m p é t e n t m e n . T h e cha rac t e r i s t i c a spec t of p h i l o s o p h i c a l con t rove r sy a n d of t h e h i s t o r y of p h i l o s o p h y c a n o n l y b e u n d e r s t o o d if t h e a p p e a l t o r e a s o n is c o n c e i v e d as a n a p p e a l to a n i d é a l a u d i e n c e — w h i c h I cal l t h e u n i v e r s a l a u d i e n c e — w h e t h e r e m b o d i e d i n G o d , * i n a i l r e a s o n a b l e a n d c o m p é t e n t m e n , i n t h e m a n d e l i b e r a t i n g or i n a n é l i t e . I n s t e a d of i d e n t i f y i n g p h i ­l o s o p h y w i t h a science, w h i c h , o n t h e pos i t iv i s t idéa l , c o u l d m a k e o n l y a n a l y t i c a l j u d g m e n t s , b o t h i n d i s p u t a b l e a n d e m p t y , we w o u l d d o b e t t e r t o a b a n d o n t h e idéa l of a n a p o d i c t i c p h i l o s o p h y . W e w o u l d t h e n h a v e t o a d m i t t h a t i n t h e d i s c h a r g e of h i s spécif ie task, t h e p h i l o s o p h e r h a s a t h i s d i s p o s a i o n l y a n a r g u m e n t a t i o n t h a t h e can e n d e a v o r t o m a k e as rea­s o n a b l e a n d sys temat i c as poss ib le w i t h o u t ever b e i n g a b l e to m a k e i t a b s o l u t e l y c o m p e l l i n g or a d é m o n s t r a t i v e p r o o f . Besides, i t is h i g h l y u n l i k e l y t h a t a n y r e a s o n i n g f r o m w h i c h w e c o u l d d r a w reasons f o r a c t i n g c o u l d b e c o n d u c t e d u n d e r t h e s ign of t r u t h , fo r thèse r e a s o n s m u s t e n a b l e u s t o j u s t i f y o u r ac t i ons a n d déc is ions . T h u s , i nd i r ec t ly , t h e ana lys i s of p h i l o s o p h i c a l r e a s o n i n g b r i n g s u s b a c k to v iews t h a t a r e f a m i l i a r i n e x i s t e n t i a l i s m .

A u d i e n c e s d i sp l ay a n i n f i n i t é v a r i e t y i n b o t h e x t e n s i o n a n d c o m p é t e n c e : i n e x t e n t , f r o m t h e a u d i e n c e c o n s i s t i n g of a s ingle s u b j e c t e n g a g e d i n i n w a r d d é l i b é r a t i o n u p to t h e u n i v e r s a l a u d i e n c e ; a n d in c o m p é t e n c e , f r o m those w h o k n o w o n l y loci u p t o t h e special is ts w h o h a v e a c q u i r e d t h e i r k n o w l e d g e o n l y t h r o u g h a l o n g a n d p a i n s t a k i n g p r é p a r a t i o n . By t h u s g e n e r a l i z i n g t h e idea of t h e a u d i e n c e , we c a n w a r d ofE P l a t o ' s a t t a c k a g a i n s t t h e r h e t o r i c i a n s f o r s h o w i n g g r e a t e r c o n c e r n f o r success t h a n fo r t h e t r u t h . T o th is c r i t i c i sm we c a n r e p l y t h a t t h e t e c h n i q u e s s u i t e d f o r p e r s u a d i n g a c r o w d in a p u b l i c p l a c e w o u l d n o t b e c o n v i n c i n g t o a b e t t e r e d u c a t e d a n d m o r e c r i t i ca l a u d i e n c e , a n d t h a t t h e w o r t h of a n a r g u m e n ­t a t i o n is n o t m e a s u r e d solely by its efficacy b u t a lso by t h e q u a l i t y of t h e a u d i e n c e a t w h i c h i t is a i m e d . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e i dea of a r a t i o n a l a r g u ­m e n t a t i o n c a n n o t b e d e f i n e d in abstracto, s ince i t d é p e n d s o n t h e h i s to r i -c a l l y g r o u n d e d c o n c e p t i o n of t h e u n i v e r s a l a u d i e n c e .

T h e p a r t p l a y e d by t h e a u d i e n c e i n r h e t o r i c is c ruc ia l ly i m p o r t a n t , b e c a u s e a i l a r g u m e n t a t i o n , in a i m i n g to p e r s u a d e , m u s t b e a d a p t e d t o t h e a u d i e n c e a n d , hence , b a s e d o n be l i e f s a c c e p t e d by t h e a u d i e n c e w i t h such c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e rest of t h e d i s c o u r s e c a n b e secure ly b a s e d u p o n i t . W h e r e th i s is n o t t h e case, o n e m u s t r e i n f o r c e a d h é r e n c e t o t hè se s t a r t i n g p o i n t s by m e a n s of a i l a v a i l a b l e r h e t o r i c a l t e c h n i q u e s b e f o r e a t t e m p t i n g t o j o i n t h e c o n t r o v e r t e d p o i n t s t o t h e m . I n d e e d , t h e o r a t o r w h o b u i l d s h i s d i s cou r se o n p r e m i s e s n o t a c c e p t e d b y t h e a u d i e n c e c o m m i t s a classical f a l l a c y i n a r g u m e n t a t i o n — a petitio principii. T h i s is n o t a m i s t a k e i n f o r m a i logic , s ince f o r m a l l y a n y p r o p o s i t i o n i m p l i e s i tself , b u t i t is a m i s t a k e i n a r g u m e n t a t i o n , b e c a u s e t h e o r a t o r begs t h e q u e s t i o n by pre-s u p p o s i n g t h e ex i s t ence of a n a d h é r e n c e t h a t does n o t ex i s t a n d to t h e

286 o b t a i n i n g of w h i c h his e f fo r t s s h o u l d b e d i r e c t e d .

Chaim Perelman

The basis of agreement

T h e o b j e c t s of a g r e e m e n t o n w h i c h t h e o r a t o r can b u i l d h i s a r g u m e n t a r e va r ious . O n t h e o n e h a n d , t h e r e a r e facts , t r u th s , a n d p r e s u m p t i o n s ; o n t h e o t h e r , va lues , h i é r a r c h i e s , a n d loci of t h e p ré fé rab le .^"

Fac t s a n d t r u t h s c a n b e c h a r a c t e r i z e d as o b j e c t s t h a t a r e a l r e a d y a g r e e d t o by t h e u n i v e r s a l a u d i e n c e , a n d , h e n c e , t h e r e is n o n e e d to inc rease t h e i n t e n s i t y of a d h é r e n c e t o t h e m . If w e p r é s u p p o s e t h e c o h é r e n c e of r e a l i t y a n d of o u r t r u t h s t a k e n as a w h o l e , t h e r e c a n n o t b e a n y conf l i c t b e t w e e n fac ts o r t r u t h s o n w h i c h we w o u l d b e ca l l ed to m a k e a déc i s ion . W h a t h a p p e n s w h e n such a conf l ic t s eems to occu r is t h a t t he i n c o m p a t i b l e é l é m e n t loses its s t a t u s a n d b e c o m e s e i t h e r a n i l lusory fac t o r a n a p p a r e n t t r u t h , un le s s we can e l i m i n a t e t h e i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y by s h o w i n g t h a t t h e t w o a p p a r e n t l y i n c o m p a t i b l e t r u t h s a p p l y to d i f f é r e n t fields. W e sha l l r e t u r n t o th i s a r g u m e n t a t i v e m e t h o d l a t e r w h e n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e dis­soc ia t ion of ideas .

P r e s u m p t i o n s a r e o p i n i o n s w h i c h n e e d n o t b e p r o v e d , a l t h o u g h ad­h é r e n c e t o t h e m c a n b e e i t h e r r e i n f o r c e d , if necessary, o r s u p p r e s s e d b y p r o v i n g t h e o p p o s i t e . Léga l p r o c é d u r e m a k e s a b u n d a n t use of p r e s u m p ­t ions , fo r w h i c h i t lias w o r k e d o u t r e f i n e d d é f i n i t i o n s a n d e l a b o r a t e r u l e s f o r t h e i r use.

V a l u e s a r e a p p e a l e d t o in o r d e r t o i n f l u e n c e o u r choices of a c t i o n . T h e y s u p p l y r e a s o n s f o r p r e f e r r i n g o n e t y p e of b e h a v i o r t o a n o t h e r , a l t h o u g h n o t ai l w o u l d necessar i ly a c c e p t t h e m as g o o d reasons . I n d e e d , m o s t v a l u e s a r e p a r t i c u l a r in t h a t t h e y a r e acceptée! o n l y by a p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p . T h e v a l u e s t h a t a r e ca l l ed u n i v e r s a l c a n b e r e g a r d e d i n so m a n y d i f f é r e n t ways t h a t t h e i r u n i v e r s a l i t y is b e t t e r c o n s i d e r e d as o n l y a n a s p i r a t i o n f o r a g r e e m e n t , s ince i t d i s a p p e a r s as s o o n as o n e t r ies to a p p l y o n e such v a l u e to a c o n c r è t e s i t u a t i o n . F o r a r g u m e n t a t i o n , i t is u s e f u l t o d i s t i n g u i s h c o n c r è t e va lues , such as o n e ' s c o u n t r y , f r o m a b s t r a c t values , s u c h as j u s t i c e a n d t r u t h . I t is c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of v a l u e s t h a t t h e y can b e c o m e t h e c e n t e r of conf l i c t w i t h o u t t h e r e b y c e a s i n g to b e va lues . T h i s fac t e x p l a i n s h o w r e a l sacr if ice is poss ib le , t h e o b j e c t r e n o u n c e d b e i n g by n o m e a n s a m e r e a p p e a r a n c e . F o r th i s r e a s o n , t h e e f f o r t t o r e i n f o r c e a d h é r e n c e t o va lues is n e v e r s u p e r f l u o u s . Such a n e f f o r t is u n d e r t a k e n in e p i d e i c t i c d i scourse , a n d , in g ê n e r a i , a i l é d u c a t i o n a lso e n d e a v o r s to m a k e c e r t a i n v a l u e s p r e -f e r r e d to o t h e r s .

A f t e r va lues , w e find t h a t a c c e p t e d h i é r a r c h i e s p l a y a p a r t in a r g u ­m e n t a t i o n . Such , fo r e x a m p l e , a r e t h e s u p e r i o r i t y of m e n o v e r a n i m a i s a n d of a d u l t s over c h i l d r e n . W e a l so find d o u b l e h i é r a r c h i e s as i n t h e case i n w h i c h we r a n k b e h a v i o r i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h a n a c c e p t e d r a n k i n g of t h e agen t s . F o r t h i s r e a s o n , s u c h a s t a t e m e n t as " Y o u a r e b e h a v i n g l i ke

P l a t o , Phaedrus 2 7 3 c ; GBWW, V o l . 7 , p . 138 . 2 8 7

The New Rhetoric

a b e a s t " is p é j o r a t i v e , w h e r e a s a n e x h o r t a t i o n to " a c t l i ke a m a n " cal ls f o r m o r e l a u d a b l e b e h a v i o r .

A m o n g a i l t h e loci s t u d i e d by A r i s t o t l e i n h i s Topics, w e sha l l c o n s i d e r o n l y t h o s e e x a m i n e d i n t h e t h i r d b o o k , w h i c h we sha l l ca l l loci oj the préférable. T h e y a r e v e r y g ê n e r a i p r o p o s i t i o n s , w h i c h c a n serve, a t n e e d , t o j u s t i f y v a l u e s o r h i é r a r c h i e s , b u t w h i c h a l so h a v e as a spéc ia l c h a r -a c t e r i s t i c t h e a b i l i t y to e v a l u a t e c o m p l e m e n t a r y a spec t s of r ea l i t y . T o loci of quantity, s u c h as " T h a t w h i c h is m o r e l a s t i n g is w o r t h m o r e t h a n t h a t w h i c h is less s o " o r " A t h i n g u s e f u l f o r a l a r g e n u m b e r of p e r s o n s is w o r t h m o r e t h a n o n e u s e f u l f o r a s m a l l e r n u m b e r , " w e c a n o p p o s e loci of quality, w h i c h set v a l u e u p o n t h e u n i q u e , t h e i r r é m é d i a b l e , t h e o p p o r ­t u n e , t h e r a r e — t h a t is, t o w h a t is e x c e p t i o n a l i n s t e a d of t o w h a t is n o r m a l . By t h e use of t hè se loci, i t is p o s s i b l e to d e s c r i b e t h e d i f f é r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e c lass ica l a n d t h e r o m a n t i c spir i t .^i

W h i l e i t e s t a b l i s h e s a f r a m e w o r k f o r a i l n o n f o r m a l r e a s o n i n g , w h a t -e v e r i t s n a t u r e , i ts s u b j e c t , o r a u d i e n c e , t h e n e w r h e t o r i c d o e s n o t p r é t e n d t o s u p p l y a l is t of a i l t h e loci a n d c o m m o n o p i n i o n s w h i c h c a n serve as s t a r t i n g p o i n t s f o r a r g u m e n t a t i o n . I t is su f f i c i en t t o s tress t h a t , i n a i l cases, t h e o r a t o r m u s t k n o w t h e o p i n i o n of h i s a u d i e n c e o n a i l t h e q u e s t i o n s h e i n t e n d s to d e a l w i t h , t h e t y p e of a r g u m e n t s a n d r e a s o n s w h i c h seem r e l e v a n t w i t h r e g a r d t o b o t h s u b j e c t a n d a u d i e n c e , w h a t t h e y a r e l ike ly t o c o n s i d e r as a s t r o n g o r w e a k a r g u m e n t , a n d w h a t m i g h t a r o u s e t h e m , as w e l l as w h a t w o u l d l e a v e t h e m i n d i f f è r e n t .

Q u i n t i l i a n , i n h i s Institutes of Oratory, p o i n t s o u t t h e a d v a n t a g e of a p u b l i c - s c h o o l é d u c a t i o n f o r f u t u r e o r a t o r s : i t p u t s t h e m o n a p a r a n d in f e l l o w s h i p w i t h t h e i r a u d i e n c e . T h i s a d v i c e is s o u n d as r e g a r d s a r g u m e n ­t a t i o n o n m a t t e r s r e q u i r i n g n o s p é c i a l k n o w l e d g e . O t h e r w i s e , h o w e v e r , i t is i n d i s p e n s a b l e fo r h o l d i n g a n a u d i e n c e t o h a v e h a d a p r e l i m i n a r y i n i t i a ­t i o n i n t o t h e b o d y of i d e a s to b e d i s cus sed .

I n d i s c u s s i o n w i t h a s i ng l e p e r s o n o r a s m a l l g r o u p , t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a s t a r t i n g p o i n t is v e r y d i f f é r e n t f r o m b e f o r e a l a r g e g r o u p . T h e pa r -t i c u l a r o p i n i o n s a n d c o n v i c t i o n s n e e d e d m a y h a v e a l r e a d y b e e n e x p r e s s e d p r e v i o u s l y , a n d t h e o r a t o r l ias n o r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a t h i s i n t e r l o c u t o r s h a v e c h a n g e d t h e i r m i n d s . O r h e c a n use t h e t e c h n i q u e of q u e s t i o n a n d a n s w e r t o set t h e p r e m i s e s of h i s a r g u m e n t o n f i r m g r o u n d . Soc ra t e s p ro -c e e d e d i n t h i s way , t a k i n g t h e i n t e r l o c u t o r ' s a s s e n t as a s ign of t h e t r u t h of t h e a c c e p t e d thes is . T h u s S o c r a t e s says t o Ca l l i c l e s i n t h e Gorgias:

If you agrée with me in an argument about any point, that point will have been sufficiently tested by us, and will not require to be submitted to any further test. For you could not have agreed with me, either from lack of knowledge or from superfluity of modesty, nor yet from a désire to deceive me, for you are my friend, as you tell me yourself. And therefore when you and I are agreed, the

288 resuit will be the attainment of perfect truth.*

Chaim Perelman

I t is o b v i o u s t h a t s u c h a d i a l o g u e is o u t of d i e q u e s t i o n w h e n o n e is a d d r e s s i n g a n u m e r o u s a s s e i n b l y . I n t h i s case , t h e d i s c o u r s e m u s t t a k e as p r e m i s e s t h e p r e s u m p t i o n s t h a t t h e o r a t o r h a s l e a r n e d t h e a u d i e n c e w i l l accept .22

Creating "présence"

W h a t a n a u d i e n c e a c c e p t s f o r m s a b o d y of o p i n i o n , c o n v i c t i o n s , a n d c o m m i t m e n t s t h a t is b o t h vas t a n d i n d e t e r m i n a t e . F r o m t h i s b o d y t h e o r a t o r m u s t select c e r t a i n é l é m e n t s o n w h i c h h e f o c u s e s a t t e n t i o n b y e n -d o w i n g t h e m , as i t w e r e , w i t h a " p r é s e n c e . " T h i s d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t t h e é l é m e n t s l e f t o u t a r e e n t i r e l y i g n o r e d , b u t t h e y a r e p u s h e d i n t o t h e b a c k g r o u n d . S u c h a c h o i c e i m p l i c i t l y sets a v a l u e o n s o m e a s p e c t s of r e a l i t y r a t h e r t h a n o t h e r s . R e c a l l t h e l o v e l y C h i n e s e s t o ry t o l d b y M e n g -T s e u : " A k i n g sees a n o x o n i t s w a y t o sacr i f i ce . H e is m o v e d t o p i t y f o r i t a n d o r d e r s t h a t a s h e e p b e u s e d i n i t s p l a c e . H e con fe s se s h e d i d so b e c a u s e h e c o u l d see t h e o x , b u t n o t t h e s h e e p . "

T h i n g s p r é s e n t , t h i n g s n e a r t o u s i n s p a c e a n d t ime , ac t d i r e c t l y o n o u r s e n s i b i l i t y . T h e o r a t o r ' s e n d e a v o r s o f t e n cons i s t , h o w e v e r , i n b r i n g i n g t o m i n d t h i n g s t h a t a r e n o t i m m e d i a t e l y p r é s e n t . B a c o n w a s w e l l a w a r e of t h i s f u n c t i o n of é l o q u e n c e :

The affection heholdeth merely the présent; reason beholdeth the future and surn of time. And therefore the présent filling the imagination more, reason is commonly vanquished; but after that force of éloquence and persuasion hath made things future and remote appear as présent, then upon the revolt of the imagination reason prevaileth.\

T o m a k e " t h i n g s f u t u r e a n d r e m o t e a p p e a r as p r é s e n t , " t h a t is, t o c r e a t e p r é s e n c e , ca l l s f o r s p é c i a l e f f o r t s of p r é s e n t a t i o n . F o r t h i s p u r p o s e a i l k i n d s of l i t e r a r y t e c h n i q u e s a n d a n u m b e r of r h e t o r i c a l figures h a v e b e e n d e v e l o p e d . Hypotyposis o r demonstratio, f o r e x a m p l e , is d e f i n e d as a fig­u r e " w h i c h sets t h i n g s o u t i n s u c h a w a y t h a t t h e m a t t e r s e e m s t o u n f o l d , a n d t h e t h i n g t o h a p p e n , b e f o r e o u r v e r y eyes."^'» O b v i o u s l y , s u c h a figure is h i g h l y i m p o r t a n t as a p e r s u a s i v e f a c t o r . I n fac t , if t h e i r a r g u m e n -t a t i v e r ô l e is d i s r e g a r d e d , t h e s t u d y of figures is a useless p a s t i m e , a s e a r c h f o r s t r a n g e n a m e s f o r r a t h e r f a r f e t c h e d a n d a f ï e c t e d t u r n s of s p e e c h . O t h e r figures, s u c h as répétition, anaphora, amplification, congerie, metabolè, pseudo direct discourse, enallage, a r e a i l v a r i o u s m e a n s of i n c r e a s i n g t h e f e e l i n g of p r é s e n c e i n t h e a u d i e n c e . ^ '

• P l a t o , Gorgias 487 d - e ; GBWW, V o l . 7 , p . 2 7 3 . t Advancement of Learning, B k . I I , x v i i i . 4 ; GBWW, V o l . 30. p . 67 . 2 8 9

The New Rhetoric

I n h i s d e s c r i p t i o n of facts , t r u t h s , a n d values , t h e o r a t o r m u s t e m p l o y l a n g u a g e t h a t t akes i n t o a c c o u n t t h e c lass i f ica t ions a n d v a l u a t i o n s i m p l i c i t i n t h e a u d i e n c e ' s a c c e p t a n c e of t h e m . Fo r p l a c i n g h i s d i scourse a t t h e level of g e n e r a l i t y t h a t h e cons ide r s bes t a d a p t e d t o h i s p u r p o s e a n d h i s a u d i ­e n c e , b e b a s a t b a n d a w h o l e a r s e n a l of l i ngu i s t i c ca tégor ies—subs tan t ives , a d j e c t i v e s , verbs , a d v e r b s — a n d a v o c a b u l a r y a n d p h r a s i n g t h a t e n a b l e h i m , u n d e r t h e gu i se of a d e s c r i p t i v e n a r r a t i v e , to stress t h e m a i n élé­m e n t s a n d i n d i c a t e w h i c h a r e m e r e l y secondary .

I n t h e sé lec t ion of d a t a a n d t h e i n t e r p r é t a t i o n a n d p r é s e n t a t i o n of t h e m , t h e o r a t o r is s u b j e c t t o t h e a c c u s a t i o n of pa r t i a l i t y . I n d e e d , t h e r e is n o p r o o f t h a t h i s p r é s e n t a t i o n b a s n o t b e e n d i s t o r t e d by a t e n d e n t i o u s v i s i o n of t h ings . H e n c e , i n law, t h e légal counse l m u s t r e p l y to t h e at­t o r n e y gêne ra i , w h i l e t he j u d g e f o r m s a n o p i n i o n a n d r e n d e r s h i s déc i s ion o n l y a f t e r h e a r i n g b o t h pa r t i e s . A l t h o u g b h i s j u d g m e n t m a y a p p e a r m o r e b a l a n c e d , i t c a n n o t ach ieve p e r f e c t ob j ec t i v i t y—which c a n o n l y b e a n i d é a l . E v e n w i t h t h e é l i m i n a t i o n of t e n d e n t i o u s views a n d of e r rors , o n e d o e s n o t t l i e reby r e a c h a p e r f e c t i y j u s t déc i s ion . So t oo i n sc ient i f ic or t e c h n i c a l d i scourse , w h e r e t h e o r a t o r ' s f r e e d o m of cho ice is less b e c a u s e h e c a n n o t d é p a r t , w i t h o u t spéc ia l r e a s o n , f r o m t h e a c c e p t e d t e r m i n o l o g y , v a l u e j u d g m e n t s a r e imp l i c i t , a n d t be i r j u s t i f i c a t i o n rés ides i n t h e théor ies , c lass i f ica t ions , a n d m e t h o d o l o g y t h a t g a v e b i r t h t o t h e t e c h n i c a l t e rmi ­n o l o g y . T h e idea t h a t sc ience cons is t s of n o t h i n g b u t a b o d y of t imeless , o b j e c t i v e t r u t h s b a s b e e n i n c r e a s i n g l y c b a l l e n g e d i n r é c e n t years.^*

The structure of argument

N o n f o r m a l a r g u m e n t consists , n o t of a c h a i n of ideas of w h i c h s o m e a r e d e r i v e d f r o m o t h e r s a c c o r d i n g to a c c e p t e d r u l e s of i n f e r e n c e , b u t r a t h e r of a w e b f o r m e d f r o m ai l t h e a r g u m e n t s a n d a i l t h e r e a s o n s t h a t com­b i n e to a c h i e v e t h e d e s i r e d r e su i t . T h e p u r p o s e of t h e d i scour se i n g ê n e r a i is t o b r i n g t h e a u d i e n c e t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n s o f î e r e d by t h e o r a t o r , s t a r t i n g f r o m p r e m i s e s t h a t t hey a l r e a d y a c c e p t — w h i c h is t h e case un les s t h e o r a t o r b a s b e e n g u i l t y of a petitio principii. T h e a r g u m e n t a t i v e process consis ts i n e s t a b l i s b i n g a l i n k by w h i c h a c c e p t a n c e , or a d h é r e n c e , is passed f r o m o n e é l é m e n t t o a n o t h e r , a n d th i s e n d c a n b e r e a c h e d e i t h e r by l e a v i n g t h e v a r i o n s é l é m e n t s of t h e d i s c o u r s e u n c b a n g e d a n d assoc ia ted as t h e y a r e o r b y m a k i n g a d i s soc ia t ion of ideas .

W e sha l l n o w cons ide r t h e v a r i o n s t ypes of a s soc ia t ion a n d of dissocia­t i o n t h a t t h e o r a t o r b a s a t b i s c o m m a n d . T o s i m p l i f y c lass i f icat ion, we b a v e g r o u p e d t h e processes of a s soc i a t i on i n t o t h r e e classes: quas i - log ica l a r g u ­m e n t s , a r g u m e n t s based u p o n t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e rea l , a n d a r g u m e n t s t h a t s t a r t f r o m p a r t i c u l a r cases t h a t a r e t h e n e i t h e r g e n e r a l i z e d o r t r ans -

290 p o s e d f r o m o n e s p h è r e of r e a l i t y t o ano the r . ^ ' '

Chaim Perelman

Quasi-logical arguments

T h è s e a r g u m e n t s a r e s i m i l a r t o t h e f o r m a i s t r u c t u r e s of logic a n d m a t h e -mat ics . I n fac t , m e n a p p a r e n t l y f irst c a m e to a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of p u r e l y f o r m a i p r o o f by s u b m i t t i n g quas i - log ica l a r g u m e n t s , s u c h as m a n y of t h e loci l i s ted i n Ar i s t o t l e ' s Topics, t o a n ana lys i s t h a t y i e l d e d préc i s ion a n d f o r m a l i z a t i o n . T h e r e is a d i f f é r e n c e of p a r a m o u n t i m p o r t a n c e b e t w e e n a n a r g u m e n t a n d a f o r m a i p r o o f . I n s t e a d of u s i n g a n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e i n w h i c h t h e s a m e w o r d c a n b e u s e d w i t h d i f f é r e n t m e a n i n g s , a logical ca l cu lus e m p l o y s a n a r t i f i c ia l l a n g u a g e so c o n s t r u c t e d t h a t o n e sign c a n h a v e o n l y o n e m e a n i n g . I n logic, t h e p r i n c i p l e of i d e n t i t y dés ignâ tes a t au to logy , a n i n d i s p u t a b l e b u t e m p t y t r u t h , w h a t e v e r i ts f o r m u l a t i o n . B u t th i s is n o t t h e case i n o r d i n a r y l a n g u a g e . W h e n I say "Bus iness is bus iness , " o r " B o y s wi l l b e boys , " o r " W a r is w a r , " those h e a r i n g t h e w o r d s g ive p r é f é r e n c e , n o t to t h e u n i v o c i t y of t h e s t a t e m e n t , b u t t o i ts s ign i f i can t c h a r a c t e r . T h e y wi l l n e v e r t a k e t h e s t a t e m e n t s as t au to log ies , w h i c h w o u l d m a k e t h e m m e a n i n g l e s s , b u t wi l l l o o k fo r d i f f é r e n t p l a u s i b l e i n t e r p r é t a t i o n s of t h e s a m e t e r m t h a t wi l l r e n d e r t h e w h o l e s t a t e m e n t b o t h m e a n i n g f u l a n d a c c e p t a b l e . S imi la r ly , w h e n f a c e d w i t h a s t a t e m e n t t h a t is f o r m a l l y a c o n t r a d i c t i o n — " W h e n t w o p e r s o n s d o t h e same t h i n g i t is n o t t h e s a m e t h i n g , " o r " W e s t ep a n d we d o n o t s t ep i n t o the s a m e r iver ,"—we look f o r a n i n t e r p r é t a t i o n t h a t é l i m i n â t e s t h e i n c o h é r e n c e .

T o u n d e r s t a n d a n o r a t o r , we m u s t m a k e t h e e f f o r t r e q u i r e d to r e n d e r h i s d i s cou r se c o h é r e n t a n d m e a n i n g f u l . T h i s e f f o r t r e q u i r e s goodwi l l a n d r e spec t fo r t h e p e r s o n w h o speaks a n d f o r w h a t h e says. T h e t e c h n i q u e s of f o r m a l i z a t i o n m a k e c a l c u l a t i o n poss ib le , a n d , as a r e su i t , t h e cor rec tness of t he r e a s o n i n g is c a p a b l e of m e c h a n i c a l c o n t r o l . T h i s r e su i t is n o t ob-t a i n e d w i t h o u t a c e r t a i n l i n g u i s t i c r i g id i t y . T h e l a n g u a g e of m a t h e m a t i c s is n o t u s e d fo r p o e t r y a n y m o r e t h a n i t is u s e d fo r d i p l o m a c y .

Because of i ts a d a p t a b i l i t y , o r d i n a r y l a n g u a g e c a n a lways a v o i d p u r e l y f o r m a i c o n t r a d i c t i o n s . Yet i t is n o t f r e e f r o m i n c o m p a t i b i l i t i e s , as, f o r i n s t ance , w h e n t w o n o r m s a r e r e c o m m e n d e d w h i c h c a n n o t b o t h a p p l y t o t h e s a m e s i t u a t i o n . T h u s , t e l l i n g a c h i l d n o t t o l ie a n d to obey h i s p a r e n t s lays o n e o p e n to r i d i c u l e if t h e c h i l d asks, " W h a t m u s t I do if m y f a t h e r o r d e r s m e to l ie?" W h e n such a n a n t i n o m y occurs , o n e seeks f o r q u a l i f i c a t i o n s o r a m e n d m e n t s — a n d r e c o m m e n d s t h e p r i m a c y of one n o r m over t h e o t h e r o r p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e r e a r e e x c e p t i o n s t o t h e ru le . T h e o -re t ica l ly , t h e m o s t é l é g a n t way of e l i m i n a t i n g a n i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y is t o h a v e r e c o u r s e t o a d i s soc ia t ion of c o n c e p t s — b u t of this , m o r e la ter . I n ­c o m p a t i b i l i t y is a n i m p o r t a n t é l é m e n t i n Soc ra t i c i r o n y . By e x p o s i n g t h e i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y of t h e a n s w e r s g iven to h i s i n s i d i o u s q u e s t i o n s , Socra tes c o m p e l s h i s i n t e r l o c u t o r t o a b a n d o n c e r t a i n c o m m o n l y a c c e p t e d o p i n i o n s .

D é f i n i t i o n s p l a y a very d i f f é r e n t rô l e i n a r g u m e n t a t i o n f r o m the o n e t h e y h a v e i n a f o r m a i System. T h e r e they a r e m o s t l y a b b r e v i a t i o n s . B u t i n 291

The New Rhetoric

a r g u m e n t a t i o n t h e y d é t e r m i n e t h e c h o i c e of o n e p a r t i c u l a r m e a n i n g o v e r o t h e r s — s o m e t i m e s by e s t a b l i s h i n g a r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n a n o l d t e r m a n d a n e w o n e . D é f i n i t i o n is r e g a r d e d as a r h e t o r i c a l figure—the o r a t o r i c a l défi­n i t i o n — w h e n i t a i m s , n o t a t c l a r i f y i n g t h e m e a n i n g of a n idea , b u t a t s t r e s s ing a s p e c t s t h a t wi l l p r o d u c e t h e p e r s u a s i v e e f î ec t t h a t is s o u g h t . I t is a figure r e l a t i n g t o c h o i c e : t h e s é l e c t i o n of f ac t s b r o u g h t t o t h e f o r e i n t h e d é f i n i t i o n is u n u s u a l b e c a u s e t h e definiens is n o t s e r v i n g t h e p u r p o s e of g i v i n g t h e m e a n i n g of a te rm.-^

A n a l y s i s t h a t a i m s a t d i v i d i n g a c o n c e p t i n t o a i l i t s p a r t s a n d i n t e r p r é t a ­t i o n t h a t a i m s a t e l u c i d a t i n g a t e x t w i t h o u t b r i n g i n g a n y t h i n g n e w t o i t a r e a l so q u a s i - l o g i c a l a r g u m e n t s a n d ca l l t o minc i t h e p r i n c i p l e of i d e n t i t y . T h i s m e t h o d c a n g ive w a y to figures of s p e e c h c a l l e d aggregation a n d in­terprétation w h e n t h e y se rve s o m e p u r p o s e o t h e r t h a n c l a r i f i c a t i o n a n d t e n d t o r e i n f o r c e t h e f e e l i n g of présence.2*

T h è s e f e w e x a m p l e s m a k e i t c l ea r t h a t e x p r e s s i o n s a r e c a l l ed figures of s ty le w h e n t h e y d i s p l a y a fixed s t r u c t u r e t h a t is eas i ly r e c o g n i z a b l e a n d a r e u s e d f o r a p u r p o s e d i f f é r e n t f r o m t h e i r n o r m a l o n e — t h i s n e w p u r p o s e b e i n g m a i n l y o n e of p e r s u a s i o n . If t h e figure is so c lose ly i n t e r w o v e n i n t o t h e a r g u m e n t a t i o n t h a t i t a p p e a r s t o b e a n e x p r e s s i o n s u i t e d t o t h e occa­s ion , i t is r e g a r d e d as a n a r g u m e n t a t i v e figure, a n d i t s u n u s u a l c h a r a c t e r w i l l o f t e n e s c a p e n o t i c e .

S o m e r e a s o n i n g p r o c e s s e s — u n l i k e d é f i n i t i o n o r ana lys i s , w h i c h a i m a t c o m p l è t e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n — a r e c o n t e n t w i t h a p a r t i a l r é d u c t i o n , t h a t is, w i t h a n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of t h e m a i n é l é m e n t s . W e h a v e a n e x a m p l e of th i s i n t h e r u l e of j u s t i c e t h a t e q u a l s s h o u l d b e t r e a t e d e q u a l l y . If t h e a g e n t s a n d s i t u a t i o n s w e r e i d e n t i c a l , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e r u l e w o u l d t a k e t h e f o r m of a n e x a c t d é m o n s t r a t i o n . As th i s is n e v e r t h e case, h o w e v e r , a d é c i s i o n w i l l h a v e t o b e t a k e n a b o u t w h e t h e r t h e d i f f é r e n c e s a r e t o b e d i s r e g a r d e d . T h i s is w h y t h e r e c o u r s e t o p r é c è d e n t i n l éga l m a t t e r s is n o t a c o m p l e t e l y i m p e r s o n a l p r o c é d u r e b u t a l w a y s r e q u i r e s t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n of a j u d g e .

A r g u m e n t s of r e c i p r o c i t y a r e t h o s e t h a t c l a i m t h e s a m e t r e a t m e n t f o r t h e a n t é c é d e n t as f o r t h e c o n s é q u e n t of a r e l a t i on—buye r s - s e l l e r s , spec-t a to r s - ac to r s , e tc . T h è s e a r g u m e n t s p r é s u p p o s e t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n is sym-m e t r i c a l . U n s e a s o n a b l e u s e of t h e m is a p t t o h a v e c o m i c r e su l t s , s u c h as t h e f o l l o w i n g s to ry , k n o w n t o h a v e m a d e K a n t l a u g h :

At Surat an Englishman is pouring out a bottle of aie which is foaming freely. He asks an Indian who is amazed at the sight what it is that he finds so strange. "What bothers me," replies the native, "isn't what is coming out of the bottle, but how you got it in there in the first place."

O t h e r q u a s i - l o g i c a l a r g u m e n t s t a k e t h e t r a n s i t i v i t y of a r e l a t i o n f o r g r a n t e d , e v e n t h o u g h i t is o n l y p r o b a b l e : " M y f r i e n d s ' f r i e n d s a r e m y

292 f r i e n d s . " S t i l l o t h e r a r g u m e n t s a p p l y to a i l k i n d s of o t h e r r e l a t i o n s s u c h

Chaim Perelman

as t h a t b e t w e e n p a r t a n d w h o l e o r b e t w e e n pa r t s , r e l a t i o n s of d iv i s ion , c o m p a r i s o n , p r o b a b i l i t y . T h e y a r e c lea r ly d i s t i n c t f r o m exac t d é m o n s t r a ­t i on , s ince, i n each case, c o m p l e m e n t a r y , n o n f o r m a l h y p o t h è s e s a r e nec-essary to r e n d e r ' t h e a r g u m e n t compe l l i ng . ^ "

Appeal to the real

A r g u m e n t s b a s e d o n t h e s t r u c t u r e of r e a l i t y c a n b e d i v i d e d i n t o t w o g r o u p s a c c o r d i n g as they e s t ab l i sh assoc ia t ions of succession o r of co­ex i s t ence .

A m o n g r e l a t i o n s of succession, t h a t of causa l i t y p l ays a n essent ia l rô le . T h u s we m a y be a t t e m p t i n g to f i n d t h e causes of a n ef ïect , t h e m e a n s t o a n e n d , t h e c o n s é q u e n c e s of a fac t , o r to j u d g e a n a c t i o n o r a r u l e by t h e c o n s é q u e n c e s t h a t i t has . T h i s last p rocess m i g h t b e ca l l ed t h e p r a g m a t i c a r g u m e n t , s ince i t is typ ica l of u t i l i t a r i a n i s m in m o r a l s a n d of p r a g m a t -ic i sm in g ê n e r a i . *

A r g u m e n t s e s t a b l i s h i n g r e l a t i o n s of coex i s t ence a r e b a s e d o n the l i n k t h a t u n i t é s a p e r s o n to h i s ac t ions . W h e n gene ra l i z ed , th is a r g u m e n t e s t ab l i shes t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e essence a n d t h e act , a r e l a t i o n of p a r a m o u n t i m p o r t a n c e in t he socia l sciences. F r o m th i s m o d e l h a v e c o m e t h e c lass i f ica t ion of p e r i o d s i n h i s t o r y ( A n t i q u i t y , t h e M i d d l e Ages), a i l l i t e r a r y c lass i f ica t ions (classicism, r o m a n t i c i s m ) , styles (Go th i c , b a r o q u e ) , é c o n o m i e o r po l i t i c a l Systems ( f e u d a l i s m , c a p i t a l i s m , fascism), a n d ins t i ­t u t i o n s ( m a r r i a g e , t h e c h u r c h ) . ^ ! R h e t o r i c , c o n c e i v e d as t h e t h e o r y of a r g u m e n t a t i o n , p r o v i d e s a g u i d a n c e f o r t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g b o t h of t h e m a n n e r in w h i c h thèse ca t égo r i e s w e r e c o n s t i t u t e d a n d of t h e r ea sons fo r d o i n g so. I t h e l p s us g r a s p t h e a d v a n t a g e s a n d t h e d i s a d v a n t a g e s of u s i n g t h e m a n d p r o v i d e s a n i n s i g h t i n t o t he v a l u e j u d g m e n t s t h a t w e r e p r é s e n t , e x p l i c i t l y o r imp l i c i t l y , w h e n t h e y t ook s h a p e . T h e specif ici ty of t he socia l sc iences c a n b e bes t u n d e r s t o o d b y c o n s i d e r i n g t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l r e a s o n s j u s t i f y i n g t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n of t h e i r ca t égo r i e s—Max W e b e r ' s Idealtypus.

T h a n k s t o t h e r e l a t i o n s of coex i s t ence , we a r e a lso a b l e to g a i n a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e a r g u m e n t f r o m a u t h o r i t y in ai l i ts shapes as we l l as a n a p p r é c i a t i o n of t h e p e r s u a s i v e r ô l e of ethos in a r g u m e n t a t i o n , s ince t h e d i s cou r se c a n b e r e g a r d e d as a n ac t o n t h e o r a t o r ' s part .^^

Establishing the real

A r g u m e n t s a t t e m p t i n g to e s t a b l i s h t h e s t r u c t u r e of r e a l i t y a r e f irst a r g u ­m e n t s by e x a m p l e , i l l u s t r a t i o n , a n d m o d e l ; second, a r g u m e n t s by a n a l o g y .

T h e e x a m p l e l eads t o t h e f o r m u l a t i o n of a r u l e t h r o u g h g e n e r a l i z a t i o n

* See J . s . M i l l , Utilitarianism; GBWW, V o l . 4 3 , p p . 4 4 3 ff. 2 9 3

The New Rhetoric

f r o m a p a r t i c u l a r case o r t h r o u g h p u t t i n g a n e w case o n t h e s ame f o o t i n g as a n o l d e r o n e . I l l u s t r a t i o n a i m s a t a c h i e v i n g p r é s e n c e for a r u l e by i l l u s t r a t i n g i t w i t h a c o n c r è t e case. T h e a r g u m e n t f r o m a m o d e l jus t i f ies a n a c t i o n by s h o w i n g t h a t i t c o n f o r m s to a m o d e l . O n e s h o u l d a lso m e n ­t i o n t h e a r g u m e n t f r o m a n a n t i m o d e l ; fo r e x a m p l e , t h e d r u n k e n H e l o t t o w h o m t h e S p a r t a n s r e f e r r e d as a fo i l t o show t l ie i r sons h o w they s h o u l d n o t b e h a v e .

I n t h e v a r i o n s re l ig ions , G o d a n d a i l d i v i n e o r quas i -d iv ine p e r s o n s a r e o b v i o u s l y p r é é m i n e n t m o d e l s fo r t h e i r be l ievers . C h r i s t i a n m o r a l i t y c a n b e d e f i n e d as t h e i m i t a t i o n of Chr i s t , w h e r e a s B u d d h i s t m o r a l i t y cons is t s i n i m i t a t i n g B u d d h a . T h e m o d e l s t h a t a c u l t u r e p r o p o s e s t o i ts m e m b e r s fo r i m i t a t i o n p r o v i d e a c o n v e n i e n t way of c h a r a c t e r i z i n g it.^^

T h e a r g u m e n t f r o m a n a l o g y is e x t r e m e l y i m p o r t a n t in n o n f o r m a l rea-s o n i n g . S t a r t i n g f r o m a r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t w o t e r m s A a n d B, w h i c h we ca l l t h e thème s ince i t p r o v i d e s t h e p r o p e r s u b j e c t m a t t e r of t h e d i scourse , we c a n by a n a l o g y p r é s e n t i ts s t r u c t u r e o r e s t ab l i sh its v a l u e by r e l a t i n g i t t o t h e t e r m s C a n d D, w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e t h e phoros of t h e ana logy , so t h a t /4 is t o B as C is to D. A n a l o g y , w h i c h dé r ives its n a m e f r o m t h e G r e e k w o r d f o r p r o p o r t i o n , is n e v e r t h e l e s s d i f f é r e n t f r o m m a t h e m a t i c a l p r o p o r t i o n . I n t h e l a t t e r t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c r e l a t i o n of e q u a l i t y is sym-m e t r i c a l , w h e r e a s t h e phoros c a l l ed u p o n to c l a r i fy t h e s t r u c t u r e o r e s t a b l i s h t h e v a l u e of t h e thème m u s t , as a r u l e , b e b e t t e r k n o w n t h a n t h e thème. W h e n H e r a c l i t u s says t h a t i n t h e eyes of G o d m a n is as c h i l d i s h as a c h i l d is in t h e eyes of a n a d u l t , i t is i m p o s s i b l e t o c h a n g e t h e phoros f o r t h e thème, a n d vice versa , un le s s t h e a u d i e n c e is o n e t h a t k n o w s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n G o d a n d m a n b e t t e r t h a n t h a t b e t w e e n a c h i l d a n d a n a d u l t . I t is a l so w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t w h e n man is i d e n t i f i e d w i t h adult, t h e a n a l o g y r e d u c e s t o t h r e e t e rms , t h e m i d d l e o n e b e i n g r e p e a t e d twice : C is t o B as B is t o ^ . T h i s t e c h n i q u e of a r g u m e n t a t i o n is t yp ica l of P l a t o , P l o t i n u s , a n d a i l t hose w h o e s t ab l i sh h i é r a r c h i e s w i t h i n rea l i ty .

W i t h i n t h e n a t u r a l sc iences t h e use of a n a l o g y is m a i n l y heu r i s t i c , a n d t h e i n t e n t is u l t i m a t e l y to e l i m i n a t e t h e a n a l o g y a n d r e p l a c e i t w i t h a f o r m u l a of a m a t h e m a t i c a l type . T h i n g s a r e d i f f é r e n t , h o w e v e r , i n t h e social sc iences a n d in p h i l o s o p h y , w h e r e t h e w h o l e b o d y of fac t s u n d e r s t u d y o n l y o f fe r s r e a s o n s fo r o r a g a i n s t a p a r t i c u l a r a n a l o g i c a l v is ion of things.^* T h i s is o n e of t h e d i f f é r e n c e s t o w h i c h W i l h e l m D i l t h e y r e f e r s w h e n h e c l a i m s t h a t t h e n a t u r a l sc iences a i m a t e x p l a i n i n g w h e r e a s t h e h u m a n sciences seek f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g .

T h e m e t a p h o r is t h e f i gu re of s tyle c o r r e s p o n d i n g to t h e a r g u m e n t f r o m a n a l o g y . I t cons is t s of a c o n d e n s e d a n a l o g y i n w h i c h o n e t e r m of t h e thème is a s soc ia ted w i t h o n e t e r m of t h e phoros. T h u s " t h e m o r n i n g of l i f e " is a m e t a p h o r t h a t s u m m a r i z e s t h e a n a l o g y : M o r n i n g is to d a y w h a t y o u t h is t o l i fe . Of course , i n t h e case of a g o o d m a n y m e t a p h o r s , t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e c o m p l è t e a n a l o g y is n e i t h e r easy n o r u n a m b i g u o u s .

294 W h e n Berke ley , i n h i s Dialogues,^'' speaks of " a n o c é a n of fa lse l e a r n i n g , "

Chaim Perelman

t h e r e a r e v a r i o u s ways t o s u p p l y t h e m i s s i n g t e r m s of t h e a n a l o g y , each o n e of w h i c h stresses a d i f f é r e n t r e l a t i o n u n e x p r e s s e d i n t h e m e t a p h o r .

T h e use of a n a l o g i e s a n d m e t a p h o r s bes t r evea l s t h e c r é a t i v e a n d lit-e r a r y aspects of a r g u m e n t a t i o n . F o r s o m e a u d i e n c e s t h e i r u s e shou ld b e a v o i d e d as m u c h as poss ib le , w h e r e a s f o r o t h e r s t h e l ack of t h e m raay m a k e t h e d i scour se a p p e a r t o o t e c h n i c a l a n d t o o d i f f i cu l t to fol low. Spe-cialists t e n d to h o l d a n a l o g i e s i n susp ic ion a n d use t h e m o n l y t o i n i t i a t e s t u d e n t s i n t o t h e i r d i s c i p l i n e . Sc ient i f ic p o p u l a r i z a t i o n m a k e s ex tens ive use of ana logy , a n d o n l y f r o m t i m e to t i m e wi l l t h e a u d i e n c e b e r e m i n d e d of t h e d a n g e r of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of thème a n d phoros?^

The dissociation of ideas

Besides a r g u m e n t a t i v e assoc ia t ions , we m u s t a l so m a k e r o o m fo r the dis­soc ia t ion of ideas , t h e s t u d y of w h i c h is t oo o f t e n n e g l e c t e d by the r h e -to r ica l t r a d i t i o n . D i s s o c i a t i o n is t h e classical s o l u t i o n f o r i n c o m p a t i b i l i t i e s t h a t cal l f o r a n a l t é r a t i o n of c o n v e n t i o n a l ways of t h i n k i n g . Ph i l o sophe r s , b y u s i n g d i s soc i a t i on , o f t e n d é p a r t f r o m c o m m o n sensé a n d f o r m a v i s ion of r ea l i t y t h a t is f r e e f r o m t h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n s of opinion.^ '^ T h e whole of t h e g r e a t m e t a p h y s i c a l t r a d i t i o n , f r o m P a r m e n i d e s t o o u r o w n day, dis-p lays a success ion of d i s soc i a t i ons w h e r e , i n each case, r e a l i t y is o p p o s e d to a p p e a r a n c e .

N o r m a l l y , r e a l i t y is p e r c e i v e d t h r o u g h a p p e a r a n c e s t h a t a r e t a k e n as s igns r e f e r r i n g t o i t . W h e n , h o w e v e r , a p p e a r a n c e s a r e i n c o m p a t i b l e — a n o a r in w a t e r looks b r o k e n b u t feels s t r a i g h t t o t h e t o u c h — w e m u s t a d m i t , if w e a r e t o h a v e a c o h é r e n t p i c t u r e of r ea l i ty , t h a t s o m e a p p e a r a n c e s a r e i l lusory a n d m a y l e a d u s t o e r r o r r e g a r d i n g t h e rea l . O n e is t h u s b r o u g h t t o t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a c o n c e p t i o n of r e a l i t y t h a t a t t h e same t i m e is c a p a b l e of b e i n g u s e d as a c r i t e r i o n f o r j u d g i n g a p p e a r a n c e s . W h a t e v e r is c o n f o r m a b l e t o i t is g i v e n v a l u e , w h e r e a s w h a t e v e r is o p p o s e d is d e n i e d v a l u e a n d is c o n s i d e r e d a m e r e a p p e a r a n c e .

A n y i d e a c a n b e s u b j e c t e d t o a s i m i l a r d i s soc i a t i on . T o real j u s t i c e w e c a n o p p o s e a p p a r e n t j u s t i c e a n d w i t h r e a l d e m o c r a c y con t ras t a p ­p a r e n t d e m o c r a c y , o r f o r m a i o r n o m i n a l d e m o c r a c y , o r q u a s i democracy , o r even " d e m o c r a c y " ( in q u o t e s ) . W h a t is t h u s r e f e r r e d t o as a p p a r e n t is u s u a l l y w h a t t h e a u d i e n c e w o u l d n o r m a l l y call j u s t i ce , democracy , e tc . I t o n l y b e c o m e s a p p a r e n t a f t e r t h e c r i t e r i o n of r e a l j u s t i c e or r e a l de­m o c r a c y h a s b e e n a p p l i e d t o i t a n d r evea l s t h e e r r o r c o n c e a l e d u n d e r t h e n a m e . T h e d i s s o c i a t i o n r e su l t s i n a d é p r é c i a t i o n of w h a t h a d u n t i l t h e n b e e n a n a c c e p t e d v a l u e a n d i n its r e p l a c e m e n t by a n o t h e r c o n c e p t i o n t o w h i c h is a c c o r d e d t h e o r i g i n a l va lue . T o ef ïec t s u c h a d é p r é c i a t i o n , o n e wi l l n e e d a c o n c e p t i o n t h a t c a n b e s h o w n to b e v a l u a b l e , r e l evan t , as we l l as i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e c o m m o n use of t h e s a m e n o t i o n .

W e m a y cal l " p h i l o s o p h i c a l p a i r s " a i l sets of n o t i o n s t h a t are f o r m e d 295

The New Rhetoric

o n t h e m o d e l of t h e " a p p e a r a n c e - r e a l i t y " p a i r . T h e use of such p a i r s m a k e s c l ea r h o w p h i l o s o p h i c a l ideas a r e d e v e l o p e d a n d also shows h o w t h e y c a n n o t b e d i s soc ia t ed f r o m t h e p rocess o£ g i v i n g o r d e n y i n g v a l u e t h a t is t yp i ca l of a i l on to log ie s . O n e t h u s cornes t o see t h e i m p o r t a n c e of a r g u m e n t a t i v e dev ices i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of t h o u g h t , a n d especial ly of ph i losophy .**

Interaction of arguments

A n a r g u m e n t a t i o n is o r d i n a r i l y a s p o k e n o r w r i t t e n d i scourse , of v a r i a b l e l e n g t h , t h a t c o m b i n e s a g r e a t n u m b e r of a r g u m e n t s w i t h t h e a i m of w i n n i n g t h e a d h é r e n c e of a n a u d i e n c e t o o n e o r m o r e thèses. T h è s e a r g u m e n t s i n t e r a c t w i t h i n t h e m i n d s of t h e a u d i e n c e , r e i n f o r c i n g o r w e a k e n i n g e a c h o t h e r . T h e y also i n t e r a c t w i t h t h e a r g u m e n t s of t h e o p p o n e n t s as we l l as w i t h those t h a t a r i se s p o n t a n e o u s l y in t h e m i n d s of t h e a u d i e n c e . T h i s s i t u a t i o n gives r ise t o a n u m b e r of t h e o r e t i c a l q u e s t i o n s .

A r e t h e r e l imi t s , f o r e x a m p l e , to t he n u m b e r of a r g u m e n t s t h a t c a n b e u s e f u l l y a c c u m u l a t e d ? D o e s t h e cho ice of a r g u m e n t s a n d t h e scope of t h e a r g u m e n t a t i o n ra i se spéc ia l p r o b l e m s ? W h a t is a w e a k o r a n i r r e l e v a n t a r g u m e n t ? W h a t is t h e ef îec t of a w e a k a r g u m e n t o n t h e w h o l e a r g u m e n ­t a t i o n ? A r e t h e r e a n y c r i t e r i a fo r assessing t h e s t r e n g t h o r r e l e v a n c e of a n a r g u m e n t ? A r e s u c h m a t t e r s r e l a t i ve t o t h e a u d i e n c e , o r can they b e d e t e r m i n e d ob j ec t i ve ly?

W e h a v e n o g ê n e r a i a n s w e r to such q u e s t i o n s . T h e a n s w e r seems to d é p e n d o n t h e field of s t u d y a n d o n t h e p h i l o s o p h y t h a t c o n t r o l s i ts orga-n i z a t i o n . I n a n y case, t h e y a r e q u e s t i o n s t h a t h a v e s e l d o m b e e n ra i sed a n d t h a t n e v e r h a v e r ece ived a sa t i s fac tory a n s w e r . B e f o r e a n y sa t i s fac tory a n s w e r c a n b e g iven , i t wi l l b e necessary to m a k e m a n y d e t a i l e d s tud ies in t h e v a r i o n s d i sc ip l ines , t a k i n g a c c o u n t of t h e m o s t v a r i e d a u d i e n c e s .

O n c e o u r a r g u m e n t s h a v e b e e n f o r m u l a t e d , does i t m a k e a n y d i f f é r e n c e w h a t o r d e r t h e y a r e p r e s e n t e d in? S h o u l d o n e s ta r t , o r finish, w i t h s t r o n g a r g u m e n t s , o r d o b o t h by p u t t i n g t h e w e a k e r a r g u m e n t s i n t h e midd le— t h e so-cal led N e s t o r i a n o r d e r ? T h i s w a y of p r e s e n t i n g t h e p r o b l e m i m p l i e s t h a t t h e fo r ce of a n a r g u m e n t is i n d e p e n d e n t of i ts p l a c e i n t h e d i scourse . Yet, i n fac t , t h e o p p o s i t e seems to b e t r ue , f o r w h a t a p p e a r s as a w e a k a r g u m e n t t o o n e a u d i e n c e o f t e n a p p e a r s as a s t r o n g a r g u m e n t to a n o t h e r , d e p e n d i n g o n w h e t h e r t h e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s r e j e c t e d by o n e a u d i e n c e a r e a c c e p t e d by t h e o t h e r . S h o u l d we p r é s e n t o u r a r g u m e n t s t h e n i n t h e o r d e r t h a t l e n d s t h e m t h e g r e a t e s t force? If so, t h e r e s h o u l d b e a spéc ia l tech­n i q u e d e v o t e d t o t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of a d i scourse .

Such a t e c h n i q u e w o u l d h a v e t o p o i n t o u t t h a t a n e x o r d i u m is ail-i m p o r t a n t i n s o m e cases, w h i l e in o t h e r s i t is e n t i r e l y s u p e r f l u o u s . Some-

296 t i m e s t h e o b j e c t i o n s of o n e ' s o p p o n e n t o u g h t t o b e a n t i c i p a t e d b e f o r e h a n d

Chaim Perelman

a n d r e f u t e d , w h e r e a s in o t h e r cases i t is b e t t e r to let t h e o b j e c t i o n s a r i se s p o n t a n e o u s l y lest o n e a p p e a r t o b e t e a r i n g d o w n s t r a w men.^^

I n a i l s u c h m a t t e r s i t seems u n l i k e l y t h a t a n y h a r d - a n d - f a s t r u l e s c a n b e l a i d d o w n , s ince o n e m u s t t a k e a c c o u n t of t h e p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r of t h e a u d i e n c e , of i ts é v o l u t i o n d u r i n g the d e b a t e , a n d of t h e fac t t h a t h a b i t s a n d p r o c é d u r e s t h a t p r o v e g o o d in o n e s p h è r e a r e n o g o o d in a n -o t h e r . A g ê n e r a i r h e t o r i c c a n n o t b e fixed by p r ecep t s a n d r u l e s l a id d o w n o n c e fo r ai l . B u t i t m u s t b e a b l e t o a d a p t itself to t h e m o s t v a r i e d c i r c u m -stances , m a t t e r s , a n d a u d i e n c e s .

Reason and rhetoric

T h e b i r t h of a n e w p e r i o d of c u l t u r e is m a r k e d by a n é r u p t i o n of o r i g i n a l i dea s a n d a neg lec t of m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n c e r n s a n d of a c a d é m i e classifica­t i o n s a n d d iv is ions . I d e a s a r e u s e d w i t h v a r i o u s m e a n i n g s t h a t t h e f u t u r e wi l l d i s t i n g u i s h a n d d i s e n t a n g l e . T h e f u n d a m e n t a l i deas of G r e e k p h i -l o s o p h y o f fe r a g o o d e x a m p l e of t h i s process . O n e of t h e r i ch e s t a n d m o s t c o n f u s e d of ai l is t h a t e x p r e s s e d b y t h e t e r m logos, w h i c h m e a n s a m o n g o t h e r t h i n g s : w o r d , r e a s o n , d i s cou r se , r e a s o n i n g , c a l c u l a t i o n , a n d ai l t h a t was l a t e r t o b e c o m e t h e s u b j e c t of logic a n d the e x p r e s s i o n of r e a s o n . R e a s o n was o p p o s e d to dés i re a n d t h e passions, b e i n g r e g a r d e d as t h e f a c u l t y t h a t o u g h t t o g o v e r n h u m a n b e h a v i o r in t he n a m e of t r u t h a n d w i s d o m . T h e o p é r a t i o n of logos t ake s ef fec t e i t he r t h r o u g h l o n g speeches o r t h r o u g h q u e s t i o n s a n d a n s w e r s , t h u s g i v i n g rise t o t h e d i s t i n c t i o n n o t e d a b o v e b e t w e e n r h e t o r i c a n d d ia lec t ic , even b e f o r e log ic was e s t ab -l i shed as a n a u t o n o m o u s d i s c i p l i n e .

A r i s t o t l e ' s d i scovery of t h e sy l log i sm a n d h i s d e v e l o p m e n t of t he t h e o r y of d é m o n s t r a t i v e sc ience r a i s e d t h e p r o b l e m of t h e r e l a t i o n of syl logist ic —the first f o r m a i logic—with d i a l e c t i c a n d rhe to r i c . C a n a n y a n d eve ry f o r m of r e a s o n i n g b e e x p r e s s e d syl logist ical ly? Ar i s t o t l e is o f t e n t h o u g h t t o h a v e a i m e d a t such a r e s u i t , a t least fo r d e d u c t i v e r e a s o n i n g , s ince h e was wel l a w a r e t h a t i n d u c t i v e r e a s o n i n g a n d a r g u m e n t by e x a m p l e a r e e n t i r e l y d i f f é r e n t f r o m d é d u c t i o n . H e k n e w t o o t h a t t h e d i a l e c t i c a l r e a s o n ­i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of d i scuss ion , a n d essent ia l ly cr i t ica l i n p u r p o s e , d i f f e r e d w i d e l y f r o m d é m o n s t r a t i v e r e a s o n i n g d e d u c i n g f r o m p r i n c i p l e s t he con­c lu s ions of a science. Ye t h e was c o n t e n t to loca te t he d i f f é r e n c e i n t he k i n d of p r e m i s e s used i n t h e t w o cases. I n ana ly t i ca l , or d é m o n s t r a t i v e , r e a s o n ­ing , t h e p remises , a c c o r d i n g t o A r i s t o t l e , a r e t r u e a n d u l t i m a t e , or e lse d e r i v e d f r o m s u c h p remise s , w h e r e a s i n d ia lec t i ca l r e a s o n i n g t h e p r e m i s e s cons i s t of g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d o p i n i o n s . T h e n a t u r e of r e a s o n i n g in b o t h cases was h e l d t o b e t h e s a m e , c o n s i s t i n g i n d r a w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s f r o m p r o p o s i t i o n s p o s i t e d as p r e m i s e s . *

• Topics I . 100a 2 5 - 3 2 ; GBWW, V o l . 8 , p . 143 . 2 9 7

The New Rhetoric

R h e t o r i c , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , was s u p p o s e d to use syl logisms i n a pe-c u H a r way, by l e a v i n g some p r e m i s e s u n e x p r e s s e d a n d so t r a n s f o r m i n g t h e m i n t o e n t h y m e m e s . T h e o r a t o r , as A r i s t o t l e saw, c o u l d n o t b e sa id t o u s e r e g u l a r syl logisms; h e n c e , h i s r e a s o n i n g was sa id t o cons i s t of ab-b r e v i a t e d syl logisms a n d of a r g u m e n t s f r o m e x a m p l e , c o r r e s p o n d i n g to i n d u c t i o n .

W h a t a r e we to t h i n k of t h i s r é d u c t i o n t o t w o f o r m s of r e a s o n i n g of a i l t h e w i d e va r i e ty of a r g u m e n t s t h a t m e n use in t h e i r d i scuss ions a n d i n p l e a d i n g a c a u s e o r j u s t i f y i n g a n ac t ion? Yet, s ince t h e t i m e of Ar i s t o t l e , log ic h a s c o n f i n e d its s t u d y to d e d u c t i v e a n d i n d u c t i v e r e a s o n i n g , as t h o u g h a n y a r g u m e n t d i f f e r i n g f r o m thèse was d u e to t h e v a r i e t y of i ts c o n t e n t a n d n o t t o its f o r m . As a r e su i t , a n a r g u m e n t t h a t c a n n o t b e r e d u c e d to c a n o n i c a l f o r m is r e g a r d e d as logical ly valueless . W h a t t h e n a b o u t r e a s o n i n g f r o m ana logy? W h a t a b o u t t h e a fortiori a r g u m e n t ? M u s t we, in u s i n g such a r g u m e n t s , a lways b e a b l e to i n t r o d u c e a fic­t ive u n e x p r e s s e d m a j o r p r e m i s e , so as t o m a k e t h e m c o n f o r m to t h e sy l log ism?

I t c a n b e s h o w n t h a t t h e p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n i n g i n v o l v e d i n ch o i ce or d é c i s i o n m a k i n g c a n a lways b e e x p r e s s e d i n t h e f o r m of t h e o r e t i c a l rea­s o n i n g by i n t r o d u c i n g a d d i t i o n a l p r e m i s e s . B u t w h a t is g a i n e d by such a m o v e ? T h e r e a s o n i n g by w h i c h n e w p r e m i s e s a r e i n t r o d u c e d is m e r e l y c o n c e a l e d , a n d r e s o r t to thèse p r e m i s e s a p p e a r s e n t i r e l y a r b i t r a r y , al-t h o u g h in r ea l i t y i t t oo is t h e o u t c o m e of a déc i s ion t h a t can b e j u s t i f i e d o n l y i n a n a r g u m e n t a t i v e , a n d n o t i n a d é m o n s t r a t i v e , m a n n e r . * "

A t first s ight , it a p p e a r s t h a t t h e m a i n d i f f é r e n c e b e t w e e n r h e t o r i c a n d d i a l ec t i c , a c c o r d i n g to Ar i s to t l e , is t h a t t h e l a t t e r e m p l o y s i m p e r s o n a l t e c h n i q u e s of r e a s o n i n g , w h e r e a s r h e t o r i c re l ies o n t h e o r a t o r ' s ethos (or c h a r a c t e r ) a n d o n t h e m a n n e r in w h i c h h e a p p e a l s to t he pas s ions of h i s a u d i e n c e (or pathos).**^ F o r Ar i s to t l e , h o w e v e r , t h e logos or use of r ea son­i n g is t h e m a i n t h i n g , a n d h e cr i t ic izes t hose a u t h o r s b e f o r e h i m , w h o l a id t h e e m p h a s i s u p o n o r a t o r i c a l devices d e s i g n e d to a r o u s e t h e pass ions . T h u s h e wr i t e s :

// the rules for trials which are now laid down in some states— especially in well-governed states—were applied everywhere, such people would have nothing to say. AU men, no doubt, t h i n k that the laws should prescrite such rules, but some, as in the court of Areopagus, give practical effect to their thoughts and forbid talk about non-essentials. This is sound law and custom. It is not right to pervert the judge by moving him to anger or envy or pity—one might as well warp a carpenter's rule before using it.

For t h i s r e a s o n , a f t e r a l o n g d i scuss ion d e v o t e d t o t h e r ô l e of pa s s ion i n 298 o r a t o r i c a l a r t , h e c o n c l u d e s :

Chaim Perelman

As a matter of fact, it [rhetoric] is a branch of dialectic and similar to it, as we said at the outset.\

T o s u m u p , i t a p p e a r s t h a t A r i s t o t l e ' s c o n c e p t i o n , w h i c h is essent ia l ly e m p i r i c a l a n d b a s e d o n t h e ana lys i s of t h e m a t e r i a l h e h a d a t h is d i sposa i , d i s t i n g u i s h e s d i a l e c t i c f r o m r h e t o r i c o n l y by t h e t ype of a u d i e n c e a n d , especial ly , by t h e n a t u r e of t h e q u e s t i o n s e x a m i n e d i n p r a c t i c e . H i s p re -cep t s a r e easy to u n d e r s t a n d w h e n we k e e p i n m i n d t h a t h e was t h i n k i n g p r i m a r i l y of t h e d e b a t e s h e l d b e f o r e assembl ies of c i t izens g a t h e r e d to-g e t h e r e i t h e r t o d e l i b e r a t e o n p o l i t i c a l or légal m a t t e r s o r t o c e l e b r a t e s o m e p u b l i c c e r e m o n y . T h e r e is n o r e a s o n , h o w e v e r , w h y w e s h o u l d n o t a lso c o n s i d e r t h e o r e t i c a l a n d , especia l ly , p h i l o s o p h i c a l q u e s t i o n s ex-p o u n d e d in u n b r o k e n d i scourse . I n th i s case, t h e t e c h n i q u e s Ar i s t o t l e w o u l d h a v e p r e s u m a b l y r e c o m m e n d e d w o u l d b e those h e himself u s e d in h i s o w n w o r k , f o l l o w i n g t h e g o l d e n r u l e t h a t h e l a i d d o w n in h i s Nicomachean Ethics, t h a t t h e m e t h o d u s e d fo r t h e e x a m i n a t i o n a n d e x p o s i t i o n of e a c h p a r t i c u l a r s u b j e c t m u s t b e a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e m a t t e r , w h a t e v e r i ts m a n n e r of p r é s e n t a t i o n . |

A f t e r Ar i s to t l e , d i a l ec t i c b e c a m e i d e n t i f i e d w i t h logic as a t e c h n i q u e of r e a s o n i n g , d u e t o t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h e Stoics. As a r e su i t , r h e t o r i c c a m e to b e r e g a r d e d as c o n c e r n e d o n l y w i t h t h e i r r a t i o n a l p a r t s of o u r b e i n g , w h e t h e r wil l , t h e pass ions , i m a g i n a t i o n , or t h e f a c u l t y fo r aes the t i c p l ea -sure . T h o s e w h o , l ike Seneca a n d E p i c t e t u s , b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s rô l e was t o b r i n g m a n to s u b m i t t o r e a s o n w e r e o p p o s e d to rhe to r i c , even w h e n they u s e d it , in t h e n a m e of p h i l o s o p h y . T h o s e l ike C ice ro , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , w h o t h o u g h t t h a t i n o r d e r t o i n d u c e m a n to s u b m i t to r e a s o n o n e h a d to h a v e r e c o u r s e t o r h e t o r i c , r e c o m m e n d e d t h e u n i o n of ph i loso-pl iy a n d é l o q u e n c e . T h e t h i n k e r s of t h e R e n a i s s a n c e f o l l o w e d suit, s u c h as Va l l a , a n d B a c o n too, w h o e x p e c t e d r h e t o r i c to act o n t h e i m a g i n a t i o n to secure t h e t r i u m p h of r e a s o n .

T h e m o r e r a t i o n a l i s t t h i n k e r s , l ike R a m u s , as we h a v e a l r e a d y n o t e d , c o n s i d e r e d r h e t o r i c as m e r e l y a n o r n a m e n t a n d ins i s ted o n a s é p a r a t i o n of f o r m a n d c o n t e n t , t h e l a t t e r a l o n e b e i n g t h o u g h t w o r t h y of a p h i ­l o s o p h e r ' s a t t e n t i o n . D e s c a r t e s a d o p t e d t h e s a m e c o n c e p t i o n a n d r e in -f o r c e d it . H e r e g a r d e d t h e g e o m e t r i c a l m e t h o d as t h e o n l y m e t h o d fit fo r t h e sciences as we l l as for p h i l o s o p h y a n d o p p o s e d r h e t o r i c as e x e r t i n g a n a c t i o n u p o n t h e wi l l c o n t r a r y t o r e a s o n — t h u s a d o p t i n g t h e pos i t i on of t h e Stoics b u t w i t h a d i f f é r e n t m e t h o d o l o g i c a l j u s t i f i c a t i on . B u t to m a k e r o o m fo r é l o q u e n c e w i t h i n th i s s c h e m e , we n e e d o n l y d e n y t h a t r e a s o n possesses a m o n o p o l y of t h e a p p r o v e d w a y of i n f l u e n c i n g t h e wil l . T h u s , Pascal , w h i l e p r o f e s s i n g a r a t i o n a l i s m i n a C a r t e s i a n m a n n e r , does n o t

• Rhetoric I. 1 3 5 6 a 5 - 1 8 ; GBWW, V o l . 9 , p . 5 9 5 . i Rhetoric I. 1 3 5 4 a 1 9 - 2 7 , 1 3 5 6 a 3 0 - 3 1 ; GBWW, V o l . 9 , p p . 593 , 5 9 5 - 9 6 . t Ethics I . 1 0 9 4 b 1 2 - 2 7 ; GBWW, V o l . 9 , p p . 3 3 9 - 4 0 . 2 9 9

The New Rhetoric

h e s i t a t e to d é c l a r e t h a t t h e t r u t h s t h a t a r e m o s t s ign i f i can t fo r h i m — t h a t is, t h e t r u t h s of f a i t h — h a v e to b e r ece ived by t h e h e a r t b e f o r e t h e y c a n b e a c c e p t e d by r e a s o n :

We ail know that opinions are admitted into the soul through two entrances, which are its chief powers, understanding and will. The more natural entrance is the understanding, for we should never agrée to anything but demonstrated truths, but the more usual entrance, although against nature, is the will; for ail men whatsoever are almost always led into belief not because a thing is proved but because it is pleasing. This way is low, unworthy, and foreign to our nature. Therefore everybody disavows it. Each of us professes to give his belief and even his love only where he knows it is deserved.

I am not speaking here of divine truths, which I am far from bringing under the art of persuasion, for they are infinitely above nature. God alone can put them into the soul, and in whatever way He pleases. I know He has willed they should enter into the mind from the heart and not into the heart from the mind, that He might make humble that proud power of reason. . . .*

T o p e r s u a d e a b o u t d i v i n e m a t t e r s , g r âce is necessary ; i t w i l l m a k e us love t h a t w h i c h r e l i g i o n o r d e r s us to love. Ye t i t is a l so Pasca l ' s in­t e n t i o n t o c o n d u c e t o th i s r e su i t by h i s é l o q u e n c e , a l t h o u g h h e h a s to a d m i t t h a t h e c a n lay d o w n t h e p r e c e p t s of th i s é l o q u e n c e o n l y i n a ve ry g ê n e r a i w a y :

It is apparent that, no matter what we wish to persuade o f , we must consider the person concerned, whose mind and heart we must know, what principles he admits, what things he loves, and then observe in the thing in question what relations it has to thèse admitted principles or to thèse abjects of delight. So that the art of persuasion consists as much in knowing how to please as in knowing how to convince, so much more do men follow caprice than reason.

Now of thèse two, the art of convincing and the art of pleasing, I shall confine myself here to the rules of the first, and to them only in the case where the principles have been granted and are held to unwaveringly; otherwise I do not know whether there would be an art for adjusting the proofs to the inconstancy of our caprices.

But the art of pleasing is incomparably more difficult, more subtle, more useful, and more wonderful, and therefore if I do

300 not deal with it, it is because I am not able. Indeed I feel myself

Chaim Perelman

so unequal to its régulation that I believe it to be a thing impossible.

Not that I do not believe there are as certain rules for pleasing as for demonstrating, and that whoever should be able perfectly to know and to practise thern would be as certain to succeed in mak-ing himself loved by kings and by every kind of person as in dem­onstrating the éléments of geometry to those who have imagination enough to grasp the hypothèses. But I consider, and it is perhaps my weakness that leads me to think so, that it is impossible to lay hold of the rules.^

Pasca l ' s r e a c t i o n h e r e w i t h r e g a r d t o f o r m a i r u l e s of r h e t o r i c a l r e a d y h e r a l d s r o m a n t i c i s m w i t h its r é v é r e n c e f o r t h e g r e a t o r a t o r ' s genius . B u t b e f o r e r o m a n t i c i s m h e l d sway, a s soc ia t ion i s t p sycho logy d e v e l o p e d i n e i g h t e e n t h - c e n t u r y E n g l a n d . A c c o r d i n g to t h e t h i n k e r s of th is school , fee l ing , n o t r e a s o n , d é t e r m i n e s m a n ' s b e h a v i o r , a n d b o o k s o n r h e t o r i c w e r e w r i t t e n b a s e d o n th is psychology . T h e bes t k n o w n of thèse is C a m p -be l l ' s The Philosophy of Rhetoric, n o t e d above.'*^ F i f t y years l a t e r , W h a t e l y , f o l l o w i n g B a c o n ' s l ead , d e f i n e d t h e s u b j e c t of logic a n d of r h e t o r i c as fo l lows :

/ remarked in treating of that Science \Logic'\, that Reasoning may be considered as applicable to two purposes, which I ventured to designate respectively by the terms "Inferring" and "Proving," i.e., the a s c e r t a i n m e n t of the truth by investigation and the e s tab­l i s h m e n t of it to the satisfaction of a n o t h e r ; and I there remarked that Bacon, in his O r g a n o n , has laid down rules for the conduct of the former of thèse processes, and that the latter belongs to the province of Rhetoric; and it was added, that to i n f e r , is to be regarded as the proper office of the Philosopher, or the ]udge;—to p r o v e , of the Advocate.*^

T h i s c o n c e p t i o n , w h i l e s t ress ing t h e social i m p o r t a n c e of rhe to r i c , m a k e s it a n e g l i g i b l e f a c t o r fo r t h e p h i l o s o p h e r . T h i s t e n d e n c y increases u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e of K a n t a n d of t h e G e r m a n idea l i s t s , w h o boas t ed of r e m o v i n g ai l m a t t e r s of o p i n i o n f r o m p h i l o s o p h y , f o r w h i c h o n l y a p o d i c t i c t r u t h s a r e of a n y i m p o r t a n c e .

T h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e i dea t h a t we f o r m of r e a s o n a n d the r ô l e a s s igned to r h e t o r i c is of suff ic ient i m p o r t a n c e t o d e s e r v e s tud ies of a i l t h e g r e a t t h i n k e r s w h o h a v e sa id a n y t h i n g a b o u t t h e ma t t e r—stud ie s s imi l a r to t hose of B a c o n by P r o f . K a r l W a l l a c e a n d of R a m u s by P r o f .

• On Geometrical Démonstration; GBWW, V o l . 3 3 , p . 4 4 0 . f I b i d . , p . 4 4 1 .

The New Rhetoric

W a l t e r J . Ong.** I n w h a t fo l lows , I w o u l d l ike to ske t ch h o w t h e pos i t iv is t c l i m a t e of log ica l e m p i r i c i s m m a k e s poss ib le a n e w , o r r e n o v a t e d , con­c e p t i o n of r h e t o r i c .

W i t h i n t h e p e r s p e c t i v e of n e o p o s i t i v i s m , t h e r a t i o n a l is r e s t r i c t ed to w h a t e x p é r i e n c e a n d f o r m a i logic e n a b l e us t o ve r i fy a n d d e m o n s t r a t e . As a r e su i t , t h e vas t s p h è r e of a i l t h a t is c o n c e r n e d w i t h ac t ion—excep t f o r t h e cho ice of t h e m o s t a d é q u a t e m e a n s t o r e a c h a d e s i g n a t e d end—is t u r n e d over to t h e i r r a t i o n a l . T h e very i dea of a r e a s o n a b l e déc is ion h a s n o m e a n i n g a n d c a n n o t e v e n b e d e f i n e d sa t i s fac to r i ly w i t h respec t to t he whole a c t i o n i n w h i c h i t occurs . Log ica l e m p i r i c i s m h a s a t i ts d i sposa i n o t e c h n i q u e of j u s t i f i c a t i o n e x c e p t o n e f o u n d e d o n t h e t h e o r y of p r o b a b i l i t y . B u t w h y s h o u l d o n e p r e f e r o n e a c t i o n t o a n o t h e r ? O n l y b e c a u s e i t is m o r e efficacious? H o w c a n o n e choose b e t w e e n t h e v a r i o u s e n d s t h a t o n e can a i m at? If q u a n t i t a t i v e m e a s u r e s a r e t he o n l y o n e s t h a t c a n b e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t , t h e o n l y r e a s o n a b l e déc i s ion w o u l d seem to b e o n e t h a t is i n c o n f o r m i t y w i t h u t i l i t a r i a n ca l cu l a t i ons . If so, a i l e n d s w o u l d b e r e d u c e d to a s ingle o n e of p l e a s u r e o r u t i l i ty , a n d a i l conf l i c t s of v a l u e s w o u l d b e d i smis sed as b a s e d o n f u t i l e idéologies .

N o w if o n e is n o t p r e p a r e d to accep t such a l i m i t a t i o n t o a m o n i s m of v a l u e s i n t h e w o r l d of a c t i o n a n d w o u l d r e j e c t such a r é d u c t i o n o n the g r o u n d t h a t t h e i r r e d u c i b i l i t y of m a n y v a l u e s is t h e bas i s of o u r f r e e d o m a n d of o u r s p i r i t u a l l i fe ; if o n e cons ide r s h o w j u s t i f i c a t i o n takes p lace i n t h e m o s t v a r i e d sphères—in pol i t ics , m o r a l s , l aw, t h e socia l sciences, a n d , a b o v e ail , i n p h i l o s o p h y — i t seems o b v i o u s t h a t o u r i n t e l l e c t u a l tools c a n n o t ai l b e r e d u c e d to f o r m a i logic, even w h e n t h a t is e n l a r g e d by a t h e o r y for t h e c o n t r o l of i n d u c t i o n a n d t h e ch o i ce of t h e m o s t efficacious t e c h n i q u e s . I n t h i s s i t u a t i o n , w e a r e c o m p e l l e d t o d e v e l o p a t h e o r y of a r g u m e n t a t i o n as a n i n d i s p e n s a b l e too l fo r p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n .

I n such a t h e o r y , as we h a v e seen, a r g u m e n t a t i o n is m a d e r e l a t ive to t h e a d h é r e n c e of m i n d s , t h a t is, t o a n a u d i e n c e , w h e t h e r a n i n d i v i d u a l d e l i b e r a t i n g o r m a n k i n d as a d d r e s s e d by t h e p h i l o s o p h e r i n h i s a p p e a l to r e a s o n . W h a t e l y ' s d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n logic, as s u p p l y i n g ru l e s of rea-s o n i n g for t h e j u d g e , a n d r h e t o r i c , p r o v i d i n g p r e c e p t s f o r t h e counse l , f a l l s to t h e g r o u n d as b e i n g w i t h o u t f o u n d a t i o n . I n d e e d , t h e counse l ' s speech t h a t a i m s a t c o n v i n c i n g t h e j u d g e c a n n o t res t o n a n y d i f f é r e n t k i n d of r e a s o n i n g t h a n t h a t w h i c h t h e j u d g e uses h i m s e l f . T h e j u d g e , h a v i n g h e a r d b o t h p a r t i e s , wi l l b e b e t t e r i n f o r m e d a n d a b l e to c o m p a r e t h e a r g u m e n t s o n b o t h sides, b u t h i s j u d g m e n t wi l l c o n t a i n a j u s t i f i ca t ion i n n o w a y d i f f é r e n t i n k i n d f r o m t h a t of t h e c o u n s e l ' s a r g u m e n t a t i o n . I n d e e d , t h e i d é a l c o u n s e l ' s speech is prec ise ly o n e t h a t p r o v i d e s t h e j u d g e w i t h ai l t h e i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t h e n e e d s t o s t a t e t h e g r o u n d s f o r h i s déc i s ion .

If r h e t o r i c is r e g a r d e d as c o m p l e m e n t a r y t o f o r m a i logic a n d a rgu­m e n t a t i o n as c o m p l e m e n t a r y to d é m o n s t r a t i v e p r o o f , i t b e c o m e s of p a r a -

302 m o u n t i m p o r t a n c e i n p h i l o s o p h y , s ince n o p h i l o s o p h i e d i scourse c a n

Chaim Perelman

d e v e l o p w i t h o u t r e s o r t i n g t o i t . T h i s b e c a m e c lea r w h e n , u n d e r the in­fluence of logical e m p i r i c i s m , ai l p h i l o s o p h y t h a t c o u l d n o t be r e d u c e d to c a l c u l a t i o n was c o n s i d e r e d as n o n s e n s e a n d o£ n o w o r t h . P h i l o s o p h y , as a c o n s é q u e n c e , lost i ts s t a t u s in c o n t e m p o r a r y c u l t u r e . T h i s s i t u a t i o n c a n b e c h a n g e d on ly by d e v e l o p i n g a p h i l o s o p h y a n d a m e t h o d o l o g y of t h e r e a s o n a b l e . Fo r if t h e r a t i o n a l is r e s t r i c t ed to t h e f îe ld of c a l cu l a t i on , m e a s u r i n g , a n d w e i g h i n g , t h e r e a s o n a b l e is l e f t w i t h t h e vast fielcl of a i l t h a t is n o t a m e n a b l e to q u a n t i t a t i v e a n d f o r m a i t e c h n i q u e s . T h i s field, w h i c h P l a t o a n d A r i s t o t l e b e g a n t o e x p l o r e by m e a n s of d i a l ec t i ca l a n d r h e t o r i c a l devices , lies o p e n for i n v e s t i g a t i o n by t h e n e w r h e t o r i c .

Further developments

I i n t r o d u c e d t h e n e w r h e t o r i c t o t h e p u b l i c fo r t h e first t i m e ove r t w e n t y years ago, i n a l e c t u r e d e l i v e r e d i n 1949 a t t h e I n s t i t u t des H a u t e s E t u d e s d e Belgique. ' '^ I n t h e cou r se of t h e s a m e year , t h e C e n t r e N a t i o n a l d e R e c h e r c h e s d e L o g i q u e was f o u n d e d w i t h t he c o l l a b o r a t i o n of t h e profes-sors of logic i n t h e B e l g i a n un ive r s i t i e s . I n 1953 th i s g r o u p o r g a n i z e d a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o l l o q u i u m o n t h e t h e o r y of p r o o f , in w h i c h t h e use a n d m e t h o d of p roo f was s t u d i e d i n t h e d e d u c t i v e sciences, i n t h e n a t u r a l sciences, i n law, a n d in p h i l o s o p h y — t h a t is, i n t h e fields w h e r e r ecou r se t o r e a s o n i n g is essential.*^ O n t h a t occas ion P r o f . G i l b e r t R y l e p r e s e n t e d h i s f a m o u s p a p e r e n t i t l e d " P r o o f s i n P h i l o s o p h y , " w h i c h c l a i m s t h a t t h e r e a r e n o p r o o f s i n p h i l o s o p h y : " P h i l o s o p h e r s d o n o t p r o v i d e p roo f s a n y m o r e t h a n t e n n i s p l aye r s score goals . T e n n i s p l aye r s d o n o t t ry in v a i n t o score goals . N o r d o p h i l o s o p h e r s t ry i n va in t o p r o v i d e p r o o f s ; they a r e n o t inef f ic ien t o r t e n t a t i v e p r o v e r s . G o a l s d o n o t b e l o n g to tennis , n o r p r o o f s t o p h i l o s o p h y . "

W h a t , t h e n , is p h i l o s o p h i c a l r e a s o n i n g ? W h a t a r e " p h i l o s o p h i c a l a r g u ­m e n t s " ? A c c o r d i n g to Ry le , " t h e y a r e o p é r a t i o n s n o t with p r emise s a n d conc lus ions , b u t o p é r a t i o n s upon o p é r a t i o n s w i t h p r e m i s e s a n d c o n c l u ­sions. I n p r o v i n g s o m e t h i n g , w e a r e p u t t i n g p r o p o s i t i o n s t h r o u g h i n f e r -ence -hoops . I n s o m e p h i l o s o p h i c a l a r g u m e n t s , w e a r e m a t c h i n g the h o o p s t h r o u g h w h i c h c e r t a i n b a t c h e s of p r o p o s i t i o n s wi l l g o a g a i n s t a w o r d e d r e c i p e d e c l a r i n g w h a t h o o p s t h e y s h o u l d go t h r o u g h . P r o v i n g is a one- leve l bus iness ; p h i l o s o p h i c a l a r g u i n g is, a n y h o w s o m e t i m e s , a n i n t e r l eve l bus iness . "**

If t h e n o t i o n of p r o o f is r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e o p é r a t i o n of d r a w i n g v a l i d i n f e r ences , i t is u n d e n i a b l e t h a t p h i l o s o p h e r s a n d j u r i s t s o n l y r a re ly p r o v e w h a t t h e y asser t . T h e i r r e a s o n i n g , h o w e v e r , does a i m a t j u s t i f y i n g t h e p o i n t s t h a t t h e y m a k e , a n d s u c h r e a s o n i n g p r o v i d e s a n e x a m p l e of t h e a r g u m e n t a t i o n w i t h w h i c h t h e n e w r h e t o r i c is concerned.**

T h e p a r t p l a y e d by a r g u m e n t a t i o n in p h i l o s o p h y h a s given r ise t o n u m e r o u s d i scuss ions a n d t o i n c r e a s i n g in t e re s t , as is s h o w n by the spéc ia l 303

The New Rhetoric

i ssue of tf ie Revue Internationale de Philosophie of 1961 d e v o t e d to t h e s u b j e c t , by t h e c o l l o q u i u m o n p h i l o s o p h i c a l a r g u m e n t a t i o n h e l d i n M e x i c o C i t y i n 1963,^" by t h e co l l ec t ion of s t ud i e s p u b l i s h e d by M a u r i c e N a t a n s o n a n d H e n r y W . J o h n s t o n e , J r . , e n t i t l e d Philosophy, Rhetoric and Argumentation,^'^ a n d by t h e spéc ia l n u m b e r of The Monist i n 1964 o n t h e s a m e s u b j e c t .

P ro fe s so r J o h n s t o n e h a s fo r m a n y years b e e n p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t e d i n t h i s t o p i c a n d h a s p u b l i s h e d a b o o k a n d m a n y p a p e r s o n it.^^ T o f u r t h e r t h e s t u d y of t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n p h i l o s o p h y a n d r h e t o r i c , h e o r g a n i z e d w i t h P r o f . R o b e r t T . O l i v e r , t h e n h e a d of t h e Sp eech D e p a r t m e n t a t P e n n s y l v a n i a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , a c o l l o q u i u m in w h i c h p h i l o s o p h e r s a n d m e m b e r s of t h e speech p ro fe s s ion m e t i n e q u a l n u m b e r s to discuss t h e q u e s t i o n . T h e i n t e r e s t a r o u s e d by th i s i n i t i a t i v e led t o t h e f o u n d i n g i n 1968 of a j o u r n a l ca l l ed Philosophy and Rhetoric, e d i t e d j o i n t l y by P ro fe s so r J o h n s t o n e a n d P r o f . C a r r o l l C. A r n o l d .

T h a t so m u c h a t t e n t i o n s h o u l d b e f o c u s e d o n a r g u m e n t a t i o n i n p h i l o ­s o p h i c a l t h o u g h t c a n n o t b e u n d e r s t o o d un l e s s o n e a p p r é c i â t e s t h e p a r a -m o u n t i m p o r t a n c e of p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n — t h a t is, of f i n d i n g " g o o d r e a s o n s " t o j u s t i f y a déc i s ion . I n 1954 I d r e w a t t e n t i o n t o t h e r ô l e of déc i s ion i n t h e t h e o r y of knowledge,^'* a n d G i d o n G o t t l i e b f u r t h e r d e v e l o p e d it , w i t h p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n to law, i n h i s b o o k The Logic of Choice.^*

A r g u m e n t a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g déc i s ion , choice , a n d a c t i o n i n g ê n e r a i is closely c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e i dea of j u s t i f i c a t i o n , w h i c h a lso is a n i m p o r ­t a n t é l é m e n t i n t h e i dea of jus t i ce . I h a v e a t t e m p t e d to s h o w t h a t t h e t r a d i t i o n a l v i ew is m i s t a k e n in c l a i m i n g t h a t j u s t i f i c a t i o n is l ike d é m o n ­s t r a t i o n b u t b a s e d o n n o r m a t i v e pr inciples .^^ j n fac t , j u s t i f i c a t i o n n e v e r d i r ec t ly c o n c e r n s a p r o p o s i t i o n b u t looks i n s t e a d t o a n a t t i t u d e , a déc i s ion , o r a n a c t i o n . " J u s t i f y i n g a p r o p o s i t i o n " a c t u a l l y cons is t s i n j u s t i f y i n g o n e ' s a d h é r e n c e t o it, w h e t h e r i t is a s t a t e m e n t c a p a b l e of vé r i f i ca t ion o r a n u n v e r i f i a b l e n o r m . A q u e s t i o n of j u s t i f i c a t i o n o r d i n a r i l y arises o n l y i n a s i t u a t i o n t h a t h a s g i v e n r ise to c r i t i c i sm: n o o n e is ca l l ed u p o n to j u s t i f y b e h a v i o r t h a t is b e y o n d r e p r o a c h . S u c h c r i t i c i sm, h o w e v e r , w o u l d be m e a n i n g l e s s un l e s s some a c c e p t e d n o r m , e n d , o r v a l u e h a d b e e n in-f r i n g e d u p o n o r v i o l a t e d . A déc i s ion o r a n a c t i o n is c r i t i c ized o n t h e g r o u n d t h a t i t is i m m o r a l , i l légal , u n r e a s o n a b l e , o r ine f f i c ien t—tha t is, i t fa i ls t o r e spec t c e r t a i n a c c e p t e d r u l e s o r va lues . I t a lways o c c u r s w i t h i n a social c o n t e x t ; i t is a lways " s i t u a t e d . " C r i t i c i s m a n d j u s t i f i c a t i o n a r e t w o f o r m s of a r g u m e n t a t i o n t h a t cal l f o r t h e g i v i n g of r e a s o n s fo r o r aga ins t , a n d i t is thèse r e a s o n s t h a t u l t i m a t e l y e n a b l e us t o cal l t h e a c t i o n o r déc i s ion r e a s o n a b l e o r u n r e a s o n a b l e .

I n 1967 a c o l l o q u i u m was h e l d o n t h e s u b j e c t of d é m o n s t r a t i o n , vér i­fication, j u s t i f i c a t i o n , o r g a n i z e d j o i n t l y by t h e I n s t i t u t I n t e r n a t i o n a l d e P h i l o s o p h i e a n d t h e C e n t r e N a t i o n a l d e R e c h e r c h e s d e Logique .^* A t t h a t m e e t i n g I e m p h a s i z e d t h e c e n t r a l r ô l e of j u s t i f i c a t i o n i n p h i l o s o p h y .

304 A m o n g o t h e r th ings , i t e n a b l e s us to u n d e r s t a n d t h e p a r t p l a y e d by t h e

Chaim Perelman

p r i n c i p l e of i n d u c t i o n i n sc ien t i f i c m e t h o d o l o g y . P r o f . A . J . A y e r c l a i m e d t h a t t h e p r i n c i p l e of i n d u c t i o n c a n n o t b e b a s e d o n p r o b a b i l i t y t h e o r y ; ^ ' y e t i t d i d s e e m p o s s i b l e t o g ive g o o d r e a s o n s f o r u s i n g i n d u c t i o n as a h e u r i s t i c pr inciple .^ '* B u t th i s is o n l y a p a r t i c u l a r case of t h e use of j u s t i f i c a t i o n in p h i l o s o p h y . I t is e s s e n t i a l w h e r e v e r p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n is i n v o l v e d .

I n m o r a l s , f o r e x a m p l e , r e a s o n i n g is n e i t h e r d e d u c t i v e n o r i n d u c t i v e , b u t j u s t i f i c a t i v e . L u c i e n L é v y - B r u h l , i n h i s f a m o u s b o c k La Morale et la science des moeurs (1903), c r i t i c i z e d t h e d e d u c t i v e c h a r a c t e r of m u c h t r a d i t i o n a l m o r a l p h i l o s o p h y a n d p r o p o s e d t h e c o n c e p t i o n of t h e sc i ence of m o r a l s t h a t m a d e i t a soc io log ica l d i s c i p l i n e , i n d u c t i v e i n c h a r a c t e r . Ye t i n m o r a l s a b s o l u t e p r é é m i n e n c e c a n n o t b e g i v e n e i t h e r t o p r inc ip les— w h i c h w o u l d m a k e m o r a l s a d e d u c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e — o r t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r c a se—which w o u l d m a k e i t a n i n d u c t i v e d i s c i p l i n e . I n s t e a d , j u d g m e n t s re -g a r d i n g p a r t i c u l a r s a r e c o m p a r e d w i t h p r i n c i p l e s , a n d p r é f é r e n c e is g i v e n t o o n e o r t h e o t h e r a c c o r d i n g t o a d é c i s i o n t h a t is r e a c h e d b y r e s o r t i n g t o t h e t e c h n i q u e s of j u s t i f i c a t i o n a n d a r g u m e n t a t i o n . ^ "

T h e i d e a of n a t u r a l l a w is a l so m i s c o n c e i v e d w h e n i t is p o s e d in o n t o -log ica l t e r m s . A r e t h e r e r u l e s of n a t u r a l l a w t h a t c a n b e k n o w n o b j e c -t ively? O r is p o s i t i v e l a w e n t i r e l y a r b i t r a r y as e m b o d y i n g t h e l aw-m a k e r ' s s o v e r e i g n wi l l? A s a t i s f a c t o r y p o s i t i v e a n s w e r c a n n o t be g i v e n t o e i t h e r q u e s t i o n . W e k n o w t h a t i t is i m p e r a t i v e f o r a l a w m a k e r n o t t o m a k e u n r e a s o n a b l e l aws ; ye t w e k n o w t o o t h a t t h e r e is n o o n e s i n g l e m a n n e r , o b j e c t i v e l y g i v e n , f o r m a k i n g j u s t a n d r e a s o n a b l e laws. N a t u r a l l a w is b e t t e r c o n s i d e r e d as a b o d y of g ê n e r a i p r i n c i p l e s o r loci, c o n s i s t i n g of i d e a s s u c h as " t h e n a t u r e of t h i n g s , " " t h e r u l e of l a w , " a n d of r u l e s s u c h as " N o o n e is e x p e c t e d t o p e r f o r m i m p o s s i b i l i t i e s , " " B o t h s ides s h o u l d b e h e a r d " — a i l of w h i c h a r e c a p a b l e of b e i n g a p p l i e d in difiEerent ways . I t is t h e t a sk of t h e l e g i s l a t o r o r j u d g e t o d é c i d e w h i c h of t h e n o t u n r e a s o n a b l e s o l u t i o n s s h o u l d b e c o m e a r u l e of p o s i t i v e l aw. Such a v i e w , a c c o r d i n g t o M i c h e l Vi l l ey , c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e i d e a of n a t u r a l l a w f o u n d i n A r i s t o t l e a n d St. T h o m a s A q u i n a s — w h a t h e cal ls t h e c lass ica l n a t u r a l law.^"

F o r g o v e r n m e n t t o b e c o n s i d e r e d l e g i t i m a t e , t o h a v e a u t h o r i t y , t h e r e m u s t b e s o m e w a y of j u s t i f y i n g i t . W i t h o u t s o m e r e a s o n a b l e a r g u m e n t a ­t i o n f o r i t , p o l i t i c a l p o w e r w o u l d b e b a s e d sole ly o n f o r c e . If i t is to o b t a i n r e s p e c t , a n d n o t o n l y o b é d i e n c e , a n d g a i n t h e c i t i zens ' a c c e p t a n c e , i t m u s t h a v e s o m e j u s t i f i c a t i o n o t h e r t h a n fo rce . A i l p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h y , i n f a c t , a i m s a t c r i t i c i z i n g a n d j u s t i f y i n g c l a i m s t o t h e l e g i t i m a t e exerc i se of p o w e r . ' i

A r g u m e n t a t i o n e s t a b l i s h e s a l i n k b e t w e e n p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h y a n d l a w a n d s h o w s t h a t t h e l eg i s l a to r ' s a c t i v i t y is n o t m e r e l y a n e x p r e s s i o n of u n -e n l i g h t e n e d wi l l . F r o m l a c k of s u c h a t h e o r y , H u m e a n d Kelsen w e r e r i g h t i n m a k i n g a s h a r p d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n w h a t is a n d w h a t o u g h t t o b e a n d c l a i m i n g t h a t n o i n f e r e n c e c a n b e m a d e f r o m o n e t o the o t h e r . 305

The New Rhetoric

T h i n g s t a k e a d i f f é r e n t o u t l o o k , h o w e v e r , w h e n o n e r e c o g n i z e s t h e im­p o r t a n c e of a r g u m e n t a t i o n i n s u p p l y i n g g o o d r e a s o n s f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g a n d i n t e r p r e t i n g n o r m s . K e l s e n ' s p u r e t h e o r y of t h e l a w t h e n loses t h e m a i n p a r t of i t s l o g i c a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n . T h e s a m e b e f a l l s Alf R o s s ' s r e a l i s t t h e o r y of t h e l a w , as h a s b e e n s h o w n i n t h e r e m a r k a b l e essay by P r o f . S t ig J0 rgensen . 83

T h e n e w r h e t o r i c h a s a l so b e e n u s e d t o t h r o w n e w l i g h t u p o n t h e ed-u c a t o r ' s task, o n t h e a n a l y s i s of p o l i t i c a l p r o p a g a n d a , o n t h e p roces s of l i t e r a r y c r é a t i o n , as w e l l as o n t h e r e a s o n i n g of t h e h i s t o r i a n . ^ * B u t i t is i n t h e f ie ld of l a w t h a t i t h a s m a d e t h e l a rges t impact.*-' ' R é c e n t s t u d i e s a n d c o l l o q u i a d e v o t e d t o t h e log ic of l a w t e s t i fy to t h e k e e n i n t e r e s t t h a t t h e s u b j e c t h a s a r o u s e d , e spec i a l l y a m o n g F r e n c h - s p e a k i n g jur is ts .** T h e f a c u l t y of l a w a t B r u s s e l s h a s j u s t i n a u g u r a t e d a n e w sér ies of l e c tu r e s , e n t i t l e d " L o g i c a n d A r g u m e n t a t i o n . "

L a w y e r s a n d p h i l o s o p h e r s w o r k i n g i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n h a v e s h o w n t h a t t h e t h e o r y of a r g u m e n t a t i o n c a n g r e a t l y i l l u m i n a t e t h e n a t u r e of l éga l r e a s o n i n g . T h e j u d g e is o b l i g e d by l a w t o pass s e n t e n c e o n a case t h a t c o m e s b e f o r e h i m . T h u s A r t i c l e 4 of t h e C o d e N a p o l é o n d é c l a r e s : " T h e j u d g e w h o , u n d e r p r e t e x t of t h e s i l ence , t h e o b s c u r i t y , o r t h e i n c o m p l e t e -ness of t h e l aw, r e f u s e s t o p a s s s e n t e n c e is l i a b l e t o p r o s e c u t i o n f o r t h e d é n i a i of j u s t i c e . " H e m a y n o t l i m i t h i m s e l f t o d e c l a r i n g t h a t t h e r e is a n a n t i n o m y o r l a c u n a i n t h e l éga l System t h a t h e h a s t o a p p l y . H e c a n n o t , l i ke t h e m a t h e m a t i c i a n o r f o r m a i l o g i c i a n , p o i n t o u t t h a t t h e System is i n c o h é r e n t o r i n c o m p l è t e . H e m u s t h i m s e l f so lve t h e a n t i n o m y o r fîll i n t h e l a c u n a . O r d i n a r y log ic b y i tself w o u l d sufï ice t o s h o w t h e exis­t e n c e of e i t h e r a n a n t i n o m y o r a l a c u n a , b u t i t c a n n o t g e t h i m o u t of t h e r e s u l t i n g d i l e m m a : o n l y l éga l log ic b a s e d o n a r g u m e n t a t i o n c a n a c c o m p l i s h t h a t .

T o c o n c l u d e t h i s g ê n e r a i , b u t f a r f r o m e x h a u s t i v e , s u r v e y , i t is neces-sary t o s tress a g a i n t h e i m p o r t t h a t t h e n e w r h e t o r i c is h a v i n g f o r p h i -l o s o p h y a n d t h e s t u d y of i t s h i s t o r y . T w e n t y y e a r s ago , f o r e x a m p l e , t h e Topics a n d Rhetoric of A r i s t o t l e w e r e c o m p l e t e l y i g n o r e d b y ph i los ­o p h e r s , w h e r e a s t o d a y t h e y a r e r e c e i v i n g m u c h a t t e n t i o n . * » R e n e w e d in­t e r e s t i n t h i s h i t h e r t o i g n o r e d s ide of A r i s t o t l e h a s t h r o w n n e w l i g h t u p o n h i s e n t i r e m e t a p h y s i c s " * a n d a t t a c h e d n e w i m p o r t a n c e t o h i s n o t i o n of phronesis o r p rudence .^ ' ^ R e n e w e d a t t e n t i o n is b e i n g g i v e n t o t h e c lass ical r h e t o r i c of C i c e r o , ' * a n d w e a r e n o w g a i n i n g a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t of r h e t o r i c a n d l og i c d u r i n g t h e M i d d l e A g e s a n d t h e R e n a i s s a n c e . ' ' ^

I t i s p o s s i b l e t o o t h a t t h e n e w r h e t o r i c m a y p r o v o k e a r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e H e g e l i a n c o n c e p t i o n of d i a l e c t i c w i t h i t s t hes i s a n d a n t i t h e s i s cul -m i n a t i n g in a syn thes i s , w h i c h m i g h t b e c o m p a r e d t o a r e a s o n a b l e j u d g e w h o r e t a i n s t h e v a l i d p a r t f r o m a n t i l o g i e s . T h i s n e w r h e t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e

306 m a y a l s o h e l p u s t o a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e A m e r i c a n p r a g m a t i s t s ,

Chaim Perelman

especia l ly of C. S. Pe i r ce , w h o , i n h i s a p p r o x i m a t i o n t o H e g e l ' s ob j ec t i ve logic, a i m e d at d e v e l o p i n g a rhetorica speculativaJ^

F o r thèse i n q u i r i e s t o b e p u r s u e d , h o w e v e r , t h e t h e o r y of a r g u m e n t a ­t i on m u s t a w a k e n t h e i n t e r e s t of p h i l o s o p h e r s a n d n o t m e r e l y t h a t of lawyers a n d m e m b e r s of t h e speech p ro fe s s ion . I n a s y n o p t i c s t u d y of t h e sub jec t , P ro fe s so r J o h n s t o n e d é p l o r e s t h e fac t t h a t t h e t h e o r y of a rgu ­m e n t a t i o n is sti l l l i t t l e k n o w n in t h e U n i t e d States , a l t h o u g h it is n o w wel l k n o w n in E u r o p e . " ^ A t t e n t i o n lias b e e n f o c u s e d o n t h e p r o b l e m s ra i sed by t h e use of p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n , a n d the field h a s b e e n e x p l o r e d a n d m a p p e d by t h e o r e t i c i a n s a n d p r a c t i t i o n e r s of t h e l aw. T h e r e is m u c h t h a t p h i l o s o p h e r s c o u l d l e a r n f r o m this w o r k if t h e y w o u l d cease con-fining t h e i r m e t h o d o l o g i c a l i n q u i r i e s t o w h a t c a n b e a c c o m p l i s h e d by f o r m a i logic a n d t h e ana lys i s of language. ' ' ' ' ' A m o r e d y n a m i c a p p r o a c h to t he p r o b l e m s of l a n g u a g e w o u l d also revea l t h e e x t e n t t o w h i ch lan-guage , f a r f r o m b e i n g o n l y a n i n s t r u m e n t for c o m m u n i c a t i o n , is a l so a too l fo r ac t i on a n d is we l l adap t ée ! to such a purpose- ' '^ I t m a y even p r o v e poss ib le t o a c h i e v e a syn thes i s of t he d i f f é r e n t a n d s e e m i n g l y o p p o s e d t e n d e n c i e s of c o n t e m p o r a r y p h i l o s o p h y , such as e x i s t e n t i a l i s m , p rag -m a t i c i s m , a n a l y t i c a l p h i l o s o p h y , a n d p e r h a p s even a n e w vers ion of H e g e l i a n a n d M a r x i s t d i a l e c t i c J ' '

The New Rhetoric

1 D u m a r s a i s , Des tropes ou des différents sens dans lesquels on peut prendre un même mot dans une même langue (1818; r e p r i n t é d . , G e n e v a : S l a t k i n e R e p r i n t s , 1967) .

2 P i e r r e F o n t a n i e r , Les figures du discours, e d . G é r a r d G e n e t t e ( P a r i s : F l a m m a r i o n , 1968) .

3 P e t r u s R a m u s , Dialectic, 1 5 7 6 é d i t i o n , p p . 3 - 4 ; a l s o i n t h e c r i t i c a l é d i t i o n o t Dialectique, 1555 , e d . M i c h e l D a s s o n v i l l e ( G e n e v a : L i b r a i r i e D r o z , 1964) , p . 62 . Cf . W a l t e r J . O n g , Ramus: Method, and the Decay of Dialogue ( C a m b r i d g e , Mass . : H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y Pres s , 1958) .

4 F o n t a n i e r , Les figures du discours, p . 64 . See also J . D u b o i s , F . E d e l i n e , J . M . K l i n k e n b e r g , P . M i n g u e t , F. P i r e , a n d H . T r i n o n , Rhétorique générale (Par i s : L a r o u s s e , 1970) .

5 H e i n r i c h L a u s b e r g , Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik, 2 v o l s . ( M u n i c h : M . H u e b e r , 1960) .

6 D o u g l a s E h n i n g e r , é d . , W h a t e l y ' s Eléments of Rhetoric ( C a r b o n d a l e : S o u t h e r n I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1963) , p . x x v i i .

7 R o b e r t T . O l i v e r a n d M a r v i n G . B a u e r , eds . , Re-establishing the Speech Profes­sion: The First Fifty Years ( N e w York: S p e e c h A s s o c i a t i o n o f t h e E a s t e r n S ta te s , 1959) . See also F r e d e r i c k W . H a b e r m a n a n d J a m e s W . C l e a r y , eds . , Rhetoric and Public Address: A Bibliography, 1947-1961 ( M a d i s o n : U n i v e r s i t y o f W i s c o n s i n Press , 1964) . P r o f . C a r r o l l C . A r n o l d o f P e n n s y l v a n i a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y h a s g r a c i o u s l y s u p p l i e d m e t h e f o l l o w i n g i n f o r m a t i o n : " T h e s t a t e m e n t a b o u t t h e b i b l i o g r a p h y i n Quarterly Journal of Speech i s n o t q u i t e correc t . T h e ' B i b l i o g r a p h y o f R h e t o r i c a n d P u b l i c A d d r e s s ' first a p p e a r e d i n t h e Quarterly Journal of Speech i n 1947 a n d w a s p u b l i s h e d t h e r e a n n u a l l y t o 1951 . F r o m 1952 t h r o u g h 1969, t h e b i b l i o g r a p h y w a s a n n u a l l y p u b ­l i s h e d i n Speech Monographs. A s i t h a p p e n s , t h e b i b l i o g r a p h y w i l l c e a s e to b e p u b ­l i s h e d i n Monographs a n d , b e g i n n i n g w i t h t h i s y e a r , 1970 , w i l l b e p u b l i s h e d i n a Bibliographical Annual, p u b l i s h e d b y t h e S p e e c h A s s o c i a t i o n o f A m e r i c a . A s f a r as I k n o w , t h i s b i b l i o g r a p h y r e m a i n s t h e o n l y m u l t i l i n g u a l l i s t i n g o f w o r k s ( a d m i t t e d l y i n c o m p l è t e ) o n r h e t o r i c p u b l i s h e d i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . "

S See V a s i l e F l o r e s c u , " R e t o r i c a si r e a b i l i t a r e a e i i n f i l ozo f ia c o n t e m p o r a n e a " [ R h e t o r i c a n d i t s r e h a b i l i t a t i o n i n c o n t e m p o r a r y p h i l o s o p h y ] i n Studii de istorie a filozofiei universale, p u b l i s h e d b y t h e I n s t i t i i t e o f P h i l o s o p h y o f t h e A c a d e m y o f t h e S o c i a l i s t R e p u b l i c o f R u m a n i a ( B u c h a r e s t , 1969) , p p . 9 - 8 2 .

9 C h . P e r e l m a n a n d L . O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a , The New Rhetoric, t rans . J o h n W i l k i n s o n a n d P u r c e l l W e a v e r ( N o t r e D a m e , I n d . : U n i v e r s i t y o f N o t r e D a m e Press , 1969) , p . 50 . F r e n c h é d i t i o n : La nouvelle rhétorique ( P a r i s : P r e s s e s u n i v e r s i t a i r e s d e F r a n c e , 1958) .

10 K e n n e t h B u r k e , A Rhetoric of Motives ( N e w Y o r k : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1950) , p . 4 3 . 11 C h . P e r e l m a n , The Idea of Justice and the Problem of Argument, t rans . J o h n

P é t r i e ( N e w Y o r k : H u m a n i t i e s Press , 1963) , p p . 1 - 6 0 . 12 1 b i d . , p . 16. 13 I b i d . , p p . 5 6 - 5 7 . 14 E d m o n d G o b l o t , La logique des jugements de valeur ( P a r i s : C o l i n , 1927) . ir> P e r e l m a n a n d O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a , The New Rhetoric. See also O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a ,

" R e n c o n t r e a v e c la r h é t o r i q u e , " i n La théorie de l'argumentation. C e n t r e N a t i o n a l e d e R e c h e r c h e s d e L o g i q u e ( L o u v a i n : E d i t i o n s N a u w e l a e r t s , 1963) , 1, p p . 3 - 1 8 ( r e p r o d u c e s n o s . 2 1 - 2 4 o f Logique et Analyse).

16 T h i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is f a u l t y , as d i a l e c t i c a l r e a s o n i n g c a n n o m o r e t h a n c o m m o n -p l a c e s (topoi) b e r e d u c e d to f o r m a i c a l c u l a t i o n . C f . O t t o B i r d , " T h e T r a d i t i o n o f t h e L o g i c a l T o p i c s : A r i s t o t l e to O c k h a m , " Journal of the History of Ideas 2 3 (1962) : 3 0 7 - 2 3 .

Babylonian Talmud, Seder Mo'ed 2, 'Erubin 136 ( e d . E p s t e i n ) . C f . C h . P e r e l m a n , " W h a t t h e P h i l o s o p h e r M a y L e a r n f r o m t h e S t u d y o f L a w , " Natural Law Forum 11 (1966) : 3 - 4 ; i d e m , " D é s a c c o r d e t r a t i o n a l i t é d e s d é c i s i o n s , " i n Droit, morale et philoso­phie ( P a r i s : L i b r a i r i e g é n é r a l e d e d r o i t e t d e j u r i s p r u d e n c e , 1968) , p p . 1 0 3 - 1 0 .

18 See C l é m e n c e R a m n o u x , " L e d é v e l o p p e m e n t a n t i l o g i q u e d e s é c o l e s g r e c q u e s a v a n t S o c r a t e , " i n La dialectique (Par i s : Presses i m i v e r s i t a i r e . s d e F r a n c e , 1969) , p p . 4 0 - 4 7 .

3 0 8 1» P e r e l m a n a n d O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a , The New Rhetoric, § § 6 - 9 .

Chaim Perelman

20 ib id . , §§ 15-27. 21 Ch. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, "Classicisme et Romant i sme dans l'argu­

m e n t a t i o n , " Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 1958, p p . 4 7 - 5 7 . 22 Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rheloric, p. 104. 23 lb id . , p. 116. 24 Rhetorica ad Herennium 4 . 68. 25 Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric, § 42. 26 T o ment ion only a few Works besides T h o m a s Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific

Révolutions (Chicago, 111.: University of Chicago Press, 1962), there is Michael Polanyi's fascinating work significantly entit led Personal Knowledge (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1958). T h e social, persuasive, nay, the rhetorical aspect, of scientific inethodology was strcssed by the physicist John Ziman in his bril l iant book Public Knowledge (London: Cambridge University Press, 1968). T h e latter is dedicated to the late Norwood Russell Hanson, whose Patterns of Discovery (London: Cambridge Uni­versity Press, 1958), and The Concept of the Positron (London; Cambridge University Press, 1963), gave much weight to the new ideas.

27 Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric, §§ 45-88. 28 I b i d . , p p . 1 7 2 - 7 3 . 29Ibid. , p. 176. 30 I b i d . , §§ 4 5 - 5 9 . 31 Ch. Perelman, éd.. Les catégories en histoire (Brussels: Edit ions de l'Institut de

Sociologie, 1969). 32 Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric, §§ 60-74. 33 I b i d . , § § 7 8 - 8 1 . 34 Ch. Perelman, "Analogie et métaphore en science, poésie, et philosophie," Revue

Internationale de Philosophie, 1969, p p . 3 - 1 5 ; see also H a n s B l u m e n b e r g , Paradigmen zu einer Metaphorologie ( B o n n : H . B o u v i e r , 1960) , a n d E n z o M e l a n d r i , La linea e il circolo: Studio logico-filosofico sull'analogia ( B o l o g n a : I l M u l i n o , 1968).

35 G e o r g e B e r k e l e y , Works, 2 vo l s . ( L o n d o n , 1843) , 2 : 2 5 9 . 36 Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric, §§ 82-88. 37 Ch. Perelman, "Le réel c o m m u n et le réel phi losophique," in Etudes sur l'histoire

de la philosophie, en hommage à Martial Guéroult (Par i s : F i s c h b a c h e r , 1964), p p . 1 2 7 - 3 8 .

38 Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric, §§ 89-92. 39 I b i d . , § § 9 7 - 1 0 5 . 40 Ch. Perelman, "Le raisonnement pratique," in Contemporary Philosophy, ed.

Raymond Klibansky (Florence: La N u o v a Italia, 1968-), 1:168^76. 41 See Paul I. Rosenthal , "The Concept of Ethos and the Structure of Persuasion,"

Speech Monographs, 1966, p p . 1 1 4 - 2 6 . 42 Cf. V. M. Bevilacqua, "Philosophical Origins of George Campbell 's Phi losophy

of Rhetoric, ' Speech Monographs, 1965, pp. 1-12; and Lloyd F. Bitzer, "Hume's Phi­losophy in George Campbell 's Phi losophy of Rhetoric," Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1969, p p . 1 3 9 - 6 6 .

4 3 W h a t e l y , Eléments of Rheloric (1828) , p p . 6 - 7 . 44 Kar l W a l l a c e , Francis Bacon on Communication and Rhetoric ( C h a p e l H i l l : U n i ­

v e r s i t y o f N o r t h C a r o l i n a Press , 1943); a n d O n g , Ramus: Method, and the Decay of Dialogue.

45 I t w a s p u b l i s h e d i n 1950 i n t h e Revue Philosophique de la France et de l'Etranger under the title "Logique et Rhétorique," 75th year, pp. 1-35, and reprinted in Ch. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, Rhétorique et philosophie (Paris: Presses univer­sitaires de France, 1952), pp. 1-48.

46 T h e Proceedings a p p e a r e d i n t h e Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 1954 , 2 7 - 2 8 .

47 G i l b e r t R y l e , " P r o o f s i n P h i l o s o p h y , " Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 1954 , p. 150.

48 I b i d . , p . 156. 49 See in this respect Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, Rhétorique et philosophie,

especially "La quête d u rationnel ," and "De la preuve en philosophie." T h e latter was publ ished in English in the Hihbert Journal 52 (1954): 354-59. T h e same thème was dealt with more ful ly in the articles "Self-evidence and Proof," publ i shed in Perelman, 3 0 9

The New Rhetoric

The Idea of Justice and Ihe Problern of Argument, p p . 1 0 9 - 2 4 ; a n d " S e l f - e v i d e n c e i n M e t a p h y s i c s , " International Philosophical Quarterly, 1964, p p . 1 - 1 9 .

s o R e p o r t s p u b l i s h e d i n t h e Symposiujn Sobre la Argumentacion Filosofica, M e x i c o , 1 9 6 3 .

51 M a u r i c e N a t a n s o n a n d H e n r y W . J o h n s t o n e , Jr. , eds . , Philosophy, Rhetoric and Argumentation ( U n i v e r s i t y P a r k : P e n n s y l v a n i a .State U n i v e r s i t y Press , 1965) . See also S t a n i s l a w K a n i i n s k i , " A r g u n i e n t a c j a f i l o z o t i c z n a w u j e c i u a n a l y t i k o w " [ T h e p h i l o s o p h i e a r g u m e n t a t i o n i n t h e c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e a n a l y s t s ] in Rozprawy Filozoficzne ( T o r u i i P o l a n d : T N T , 1969) , p p . 1 2 7 ^ 2 .

52 H e n r y W . J o h n s t o n e , Jr. , Philosophy and Argument ( U n i v e r s i t y P a r k : P e n n s y l v a n i a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y Press , 1959); i d e m , " P h i l o s o p h y a n d A r g u m e n t u m a d H o m i n e m , " Jour­nal of Philosophy 4 9 (1952): 4 8 9 - 9 8 ; i d e m , " T h e M e t h o d s of P h i l o s o p h i c a l P o l e m i c , " Methodos 5 (1953) : 1 3 1 - ^ 0 ; i d e m , " N e w O u t l o o k s o n C o n t r o v e r s y , " Review of Meta­physics 12 (1958) : 5 7 - 6 7 ; i d e m , " C a n P h i l o s o p h i c a l A r g u m e n t s B e V a l i d , " Bucknell Review 11 (1963) : 8 9 - 9 8 ; i d e m , " S e l f - r e f u t a t i o n a n d V a l i d i t y , " The Monist, 1964, p p . 4 6 7 - 8 5 .

63 P e r e l m a n , The Idea of Justice and the Problern of Argument, p p . 8 8 - 9 7 . 5* G i d o n G o t t l i e b , The Logic of Choice ( L o n d o n : G e o r g e A l l e n & U n w i n , 1968) . 55 See C h . P e r e l m a n , " J u g e m e n t s d e v a l e u r , j u s t i f i c a t i o n e t a r g u m e n t a t i o n , " Revue

Internationale de Philosophie, 1961, 11, 3 2 7 - 3 5 ; r e p r i n t e d i n P e r e l m a n , Justice et raison ( B r u s s e l s : P r e s s e s u n i v e r s i t a i r e s d e B r u x e l l e s , 1963) . A l s o i n P e r e l m a n , Justice ( N e w Y o r k : R a n d o m H o u s e , 1967) , c h a p . 4 .

se Entretiens de Liège ( L o u v a i n : N a u w e l a e r t s , 1968) . 57 A . J . A y e r , " I n d u c t i o n a n d t h e C a l c u l u s o f P r o b a b i l i t i e s , " i n Entretiens de Liège,

p p . 9 5 - 1 0 8 . 58 C f . C h . P e r e l m a n , " S y n t h è s e f i n a l e , " i n Entretiens de Liège, p p . 3 3 8 - 4 0 . 59 See " J u g e m e n t m o r a l e t p r i n c i p e s m o r a u x , " a n d " S c e p t i c i s m e m o r a l e t p h i l o s o p h i e

m o r a l e , " i n P e r e l m a n , Droit, morale et philosophie. 80 M i c h e l V i l l e y , Leçons d'histoire de la philosophie du droit ( P a r i s : D a l l o z , 1957) ,

a n d , e s p e c i a l l y , " Q u e s t i o n s d e l o g i q u e j u r i d i q u e d a n s l ' h i s t o i r e d e l a p h i l o s o p h i e d u d r o i t , " i n Etudes de Logique Juridique 2, C e n t r e N a t i o n a l d e R e c h e r c h e s d e L o g i q u e ( B r u s s e l s : B r u y l a n t , 1967) , p p . 3 - 2 2 .

81 C h . P e r e l m a n , " A u t o r i t é , i d é o l o g i e e t v i o l e n c e , " i n Annales de l'Institut de Philosophie de l'Université Libre de Bruxelles ( B r u s s e l s : E d i t i o n s d e l ' I n s t i t u t d e S o c i o l o g i e , 1969) , p p . 9 - 2 0 .

82 C h . P e r e l m a n , " L a t h é o r i e p u r e d u d r o i t e t l ' a r g u m e n t a t i o n , " i n Law, State, and International Légal Order: Essays in Honor of Hans Kelsen, e d . S a l o E n g e l a n d R u d o l f A . M é t a l l ( K n o x v i l l e : U n i v e r s i t y o f T e n n e s s e e Press , 1964) , p p . 2 2 5 - 3 2 .

63 " A r g u m e n t a t i o n a n d D é c i s i o n , " i n Festkrift Alf Ross, e d . M o g e n s B l e g v a d , M a x Sç frenson , a n d Isi F o i g h e l ( C o p e n h a g e n : J u r i s t f o r b u n d e t s F ô r l a g e t , 1969) , p p . 2 6 1 - 8 4 ( w i t h n u m e r o u s b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l n o t e s ) .

84 M a x L o r e a u , " R h e t o r i c as t h e L o g i c o f t h e B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e s , " t rans . L l o y d I . W a t -k i n s a n d P a u l D . B r a n d e s , Quarterly Journal of Speech, 1965 , p p . 4 5 5 - 6 3 ; O t t o P ô g g e l e r , " D i a l e k t i k u n d T o p i k , " i n Hermeneutik und Dialektik, e d . J . C . B . M o h r ( T ù b i n g e n , G e r m a n y , 1970) , 2 : 2 7 3 - 3 1 0 . Cf . " E d u c a t i o n e t r h é t o r i q u e , " in P e r e l m a n , Justice et raison, p p . 104—17; a n d B. G i l l e m a i n , " R a i s o n e t r h é t o r i q u e , l e s t e c h n i q u e s d e l ' a r g u m e n t a t i o n e t l a p é d a g o g i e , " Revue de l'Enseignement Philosophique, 1960 , (3) , 1961, (2); P a o l o F a c c h i , éd . , La propaganda politica in Italia ( B o l o g n a : S o c i e t à é d i t r i c e il M u l i n o , 1960) . A l s o , R e n a t o B a r i l l i , Poetica e retorica ( M i l a n , 1969) ; C h . P e r e l m a n , é d . . Raisonnement et démarches de l'historien, 2 d e d . ( B r u s s e l s : E d i t i o n s d e l ' I n s t i t u t d e S o c i o l o g i e , 1965) ; a n d G i u l i o P r e t i , Retorica e logica ( T u r i n : G . E i n a u d i , 1968) .

85 E d g a r B o d e n h e i m e r , " A N e g l e c t e d T h e o r y o f L é g a l R e a s o n i n g , " Journal of Légal Education, 1969 , p p . 3 7 3 - 4 0 2 .

A . H . C a m p b e l l , " O n F o r g e t t i n g O n e ' s L a w , " The Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law, L o n d o n , 1963.

G e o r g e G . C h r i s t i e , " O b j e c t i v i t y i n t h e L a w , " Yale Law Journal, 1963, p p . 1 3 1 1 - 5 0 . P e r O l a f E k e l ô f , " T o p i k u n d j u r a , " i n Universitetet och forskningen [ U n i v e r s i t y

a n d s c i e n c e ] , e d . B i r g e r L i n d s k o g ( U p p s a l a , 1968) , p p . 2 0 7 - 2 4 . T h e a u t h o r a l s o r e f e r s t o S t e p h c n E . T o u l m i n ' s The Uses of Argument ( L o n d o n : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Pres s ,

3 1 0 1958) , i n w h i c h T o u l m i n d e v e l o p s a t h e o r y o f t o p i c s w i t h o u t r e f e r r i n g t o r h e t o r i c o r

Chaim Perelman

e v e n t o t h e i d e a o f a n a u d i e n c e . A l e s s a n d r o G i u l i a n i , / / concetto di prova: Contributo alla logica giuridica ( M i l a n :

A . G i u f f r è , 1961) ; i d e m , " L ' é l é m e n t j u r i d i q u e d a n s l a l o g i q u e m é d i é v a l e , " i n La théorie de l'argumentation (see n o t e 15), p p . 5 4 0 - 9 0 ; i d e m , " I n f l u e n c e o f R h e t o r i c o n t h e L a w o f E v i d e n c e a n d P l e a d i n g , " The Juridical Review, 1969; i d e m , " L a l o g i q u e j u r i d i q u e c o m m e t h é o r i e d e la c o n t r o v e r s e , " Archives de Philosophie du Droit, 1966, p p . 8 7 - 1 1 3 ; i d e m , La controversia, Contributo alla logica giuridica ( P a v i a , I ta ly : P u b b l i c a z i o n i d é l i a U n i v e r s i t à d i P a v i a , 1966) .

G r a h a m H u g h e s , " R u l e s , P o l i c y a n d D e c i s i o n - M a k i n g , " i n Law, Reason, and Justice: Essays in Légal Philosophy, e d . G r a h a m H u g h e s ( N e w Y o r k : N e w York U n i -v e r s i t y Press , 1969) , p p . 1 0 1 - 3 5 .

L u i s R e c a s é n s - S i c h e s , La logica de los problemas humanos ( M e x i c o : D i a n o i a , 1964) , p p . 3 - 3 4 . " T h e L o g i c o f t h e R e a s o n a b l e a s D i f î e r e n t i a t e d f r o m t h e L o g i c o f t h e R a t i o n a l , " i n Essays in Jurisprudence in Honor of Roscoe Pound, e d . R a l p h A . N e w m a n ( I n d i a n a p o l i s , I n d . : B o b b s - M e r r i l l Co . , 1962) .

J u l i u s S t o n e , Légal System and Lawyers' Reasonings ( L o n d o n : S t e v e n s & S o n s , 1964) , p p . 3 2 5 - 3 7 .

I l m a r T a m m e l o , " T h e L a w o f N a t i o n s a n d t h e R h e t o r i c a l T r a d i t i o n of L é g a l R e a s o n i n g , " i n Indian Yearbook of International Affairs ( M a d r a s : D i o c e s a n Pres s , 1964) , p p . 2 2 7 - 5 8 .

R e n a t o T r ê v e s , " M e t a p h y s i c s a n d M e t h o d o l o g y i n t h e P h i l o s o p h y of L a w , " i n H u g h e s , Law, Reason, and Justice, p p . 2 3 5 - 5 4 .

T h e o d o r V i e h w e g , Topik und Jurisprudenz ( M u n i c h : B e c k - V e r l a g , 1963), a n d h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e G e r m a n é d i t i o n o f m y s t u d i e s o n j u s t i c e . Die Gerechtigkeil ( M u n i c h : B e c k - V e r l a g , 1967) .

F r a n z W i e a c k e r , " Z u r p r a k t i s c h e n L e i s t u n g d e r R e c h t s d o g m a t i k , " in M o h r , Hermeneutik und Dialektik, 2 : 3 1 1 - 3 6 .

G e o r g e W r ô b l e w s k i , " L é g a l R e a s o n i n g s i n L é g a l I n t e r p r é t a t i o n , " i n Etudes de Logique Juridique 3 ( B r u s s e l s : B r u y l a n t , 1969) , p p . 3 - 3 1 .

86 See t h e v o l u m e o f t h e Archives de Philosophie du Droit o f 1961 d e v o t e d t o t h e l o g i c of l a w ; t h e c o U o q u i u m o f T o u l o u s e o n l é g a l l o g i c . Annales de la Faculté de Droit de Toulouse, 1967 , fasc . I; t h a t o f t h e Instituts d'Etudes Judiciaires de Paris, 1967, o f w h i c h t h e P r o c e e d i n g s a p p e a r e d u n d e r t h e t i t l e La logique judiciaire (Par i s : P r e s s e s u n i v e r s i t a i r e s d e F r a n c e , 1969) . T h e n e x t C o n g r e s s o f t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l A s s o c i a ­t i o n f o r L é g a l P h i l o s o p h y , w h i c h w i l l b e h e l d i n B r u s s e l s i n 1971, w i l l d e a l w i t h t h e s a m e t h è m e .

67 See C h . P e r e l m a n , " D r o i t , l o g i q u e e t a r g u m e n t a t i o n , " Revue de l'Université de Bruxelles, 1968 , p p . 3 8 7 - 9 8 . T h e w o r k s p r o d u c e d b y t h e l é g a l s e c t i o n o f the C e n t r e N a t i o n a l d e R e c h e r c h e s d e L o g i q u e h a v e u n d e n i a b l y b r o u g h t a r e m a r k a b l e c o n t r i b u ­t i o n t o a r e n e w e d o u t l o o k o f t h e w h o l e s u b j e c t (see A . B a y a r t , " L e C e n t r e N a t i o n a l B e l g e d e R e c h e r c h e s d e L o g i q u e , " Archives de Philosophie du Droit, 1968 , p p . 1 7 1 - 8 0 ; a n d P a u l F o r i e r s , " L ' é t a t d e s r e c h e r c h e s d e l o g i q u e j u r i d i q u e e n B e l g i q u e , " in Etudes de Logique Juridique 2 , p p . 2 3 - 4 2 ) . B e s i d e s n u m e r o u s a r t i c l e s w r i t t e n b y m e m b e r s a n d o f w h i c h s e v e r a l a p p c a r e d i n t h e Journal des Tribunaux, B r u s s e l s , t h e C e n t e r h a s p u b l i s h e d , s i n c e 1961, t h r e e l a r g e v o l u m e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y e n t i t l e d Le fait et le droit ( B r u s s e l s : B r u y l a n t , 1961) , Les antinomies en droit ( B r u s s e l s : B r u y l a n t , 1965), a n d Le problème des lacunes en droit ( B r u s s e l s : B r u y l a n t , 1968 ) .

68 W e w i l l m e n t i o n , i n t h i s r e s p e c t , W . A. d e P a t e r ' s t h e s i s Les topiques d'Aristote et la dialectique platonicienne. E t u d e s T h o m i s t i q u e s , v o l . 10 ( F r i b o u r g : E d i t i o n s St . P a u l , 1965) , as w e l l as t h e f a c t t h a t t h e 3 r d S y m p o s i u m A r i s t o t e l i c u m o f O x f o r d h a s b e e n e n t i r e l y d e v o t e d to t h e Topics ( G . E . L . O w e n , é d . , Aristotle on Dialectic [ O x f o r d : C l a r e n d o n Pres s , 1968] ) .

69 P i e r r e A u b e n q u e , Le problème de l'être chez Aristote (Par i s : Presses u n i v e r s i t a i r e s d e F r a n c e , 1962) .

P i e r r e A u b e n q u e , La prudence chez Aristote ( P a r i s : P r e s s e s u n i v e r s i t a i r e s d e F r a n c e , 1963 ) .

71 A l a i n M i c h e l p u b l i s h e d , i n 1960, a n e s s a y o n t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l f o u n d a t i o n s o f t h e ar t o f p e r s u a s i o n e n t i t l e d Rhétorique et philosophie chez Cicéron (Par is : Presses u n i ­v e r s i t a i r e s d e F r a n c e ) , w h i l e R e n a t o B a r i l l i d e v o t e d a n i m p o r t a n t , l i v e l y c h a p t e r t o C i c e r o i n h i s Poetica e retorica (see n o t e 64 ) .

The New Rhetoric

l'2 W e h a v e a l r e a d y m e n t i o n e d A l e s s a n d r o G i u l i a n i , w h o s e w o r k s c o v e r t h e p e r i o d s t r e t c h i n g f r o m A r i s t o t l e t o t h e S c o t t i s h p h i l o s o p h y , w i t h o u t n e g l e c t i n g m é d i é v a l l o g i c , a n d s h e d n e w l i g h t o n t h e h i s t o r y o f l é g a l l o g i c . M e n t i o n m u s t a l s o b e m a d e o f G . C h e -v r i e r ' s s u g g e s t i v e s t u d y " S u r l ' a r t d e l ' a r g u m e n t a t i o n c h e z q u e l q u e s r o m a n i s t e s m é d i é ­v a u x a u X l l e e t a u X l I I e s i è c l e , " Archives de Philosophie du Droit, 1 9 6 6 , p p . 1 1 5 ^ 8 . F i n a l l y l e t u s r e c a l l t h e w e l l - k n o w n w o r k s o f E u g e n i o G a r i n a n d o f h i s d i s c i p l e s , w h i c h h a v e d r a w n a t t e n t i o n a g a i n t o t h e I t a l i a n p h i l o s o p h y o f t h e R e n a i s s a n c e a n d t o f if-t e e n t h - a n d s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y h u m a n i s m , i n w h i c h d i s c u s s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n p h i l o s o p h y , d i a l e c t i c , a n d r h e t o r i c o c c u p i e d a c e n t r a l p l a c e : G a r i n , Medioevo e Rinascimento ( B a r i , I t a l y : L a t e r z a , 1961) ; a n d G a r i n , P a o l o R o s s i , a n d C e s a r e V a s o l i . e d s . , Testi umanistici su la retorica ( R o m e : F r a t e l l i B o c c a , 1 9 5 3 ) . B e s i d e s G a r i n ' s o w n w r i t -i n g s , w e m u s t m e n t i o n t h o s e o f P a o l o R o s s i : " L a c e l e b r a z i o n e d é l i a r e t o r i c a e l a p o l e r a i c a a n t i m e t a f i s i c a n e l De principiis Ai M a r i o N i z o l i o , " i n La crisi dell'uso dogmatico délie ragione, e d . A n t o n i o B a n f i ( M i l a n , 1 9 5 3 ) , p p . 9 9 - 2 2 1 ; a n d C e s a r e \ ' a s o l i , La dialettica e la retorica dell'umanesimo ( M i l a n : F e l t r i n e l l i , 1968) .

"3 G. S. P e i r c e , Collected Papers, 6 v o l s . , e d . C h a r l e s H a r t s h o r n e a n d P a u l W e i s s ( C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . : H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 3 1 - 3 5 ) , 1 : 4 4 4 .

K l i b a n s k y , Contemporary Philosophy {see n o t e 40 ) , 1 : 1 7 7 - 8 4 . 76 See my a r t i c l e " W h a t t h e P h i l o s o p h e r M a y L e a r n f r o m t h e S t u d y o f L a w , " Natural

Laui Forum 11 ( 1 9 6 6 ) : 1 - 1 2 , r e p r o d u c e d as a n a p p e n d i x t o t h e v o l u m e Justice. 76 C f . C h . P e r e l m a n a n d L . O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a , " L e s n o t i o n s e t l ' a r g u m e n t a t i o n , "

Archivio di filosofia, R o m e , 1 9 5 5 , p p . 2 4 9 - 6 9 ; i d e m , " D e l a t e m p o r a l i t é c o m m e c a r a c t è r e d e l ' a r g u m e n t a t i o n , " Archivio di Filosofia, 1958 , p p . 11 ,5-33 . L . O l b r e c h t s - T y t e c a , " L e s d é f i n i t i o n s d e s s t a t i s t i c i e n s , " Logique et Analyse 3 ( 1 9 6 0 ) : 4 9 - 6 9 . C h . P e r e l m a n , " A v o i r u n s e n s e t d o n n e r u n s e n s , " i n Thinking and Meaning, E n t r e t i e n s d ' O x f o r d , i n Logique et Analyse, 1 9 6 2 , p p . 2 3 5 - 3 9 .

77 C h . P e r e l m a n , " T h e D i a l e c t i c a l M e t h o d a n d t h e P a r t P l a y e d b y t h e I n t e r l o c u t o r i n t h e D i a l o g u e , " i n P e r e l m a n , The Idea of Justice and the Problein of Argument, p p . 1 6 1 - 6 7 ; i d e m , " D i a l e c t i q u e e t D i a l o g u e , " i n Hermeneutik und Dialektik (see n o t e 6 4 ) , 2 : 7 7 - 8 4 .

N O T E T O T H E R E A D E R

P r o f e s s e r P e r e l m a n n o t e s t h a t t h e n e w r h e t o r i c c o m b i n e s é l é m e n t s t h a t w e r e

t r e a t e d s e p a r a t e l y b y A r i s t o t l e a s b e l o n g i n g t o d i a l e c t i c a n d r h e t o r i c . B o t h i d e a s ,

i t s h o u l d b e r e m e m b e r e d , m e r i t e n t i r e c h a p t e r s i n t h e Syntopicon, C h a p t e r 1 8

b e i n g d e v o t e d t o D I A L E C T I C a n d C h a p t e r 8 1 t o R H E T O R I C . I n t h è s e c h a p t e r s t h e

r e a d e r w i l l f i n d a b u n d a n t m a t e r i a l o n t h e c l a s s i c a l t r a d i t i o n o f t h è s e a r t s .

I n The Praise of Folly b y E r a s m u s , p r i n t e d b e l o w i n P a r t F o u r , t h e r e a d e r

w i l l f i n d a m i n o r m a s t e r p i e c e t h a t r e f l e c t s a n d c o m m é m o r â t e s a n e a r l i e r r e v i v a l

o f r h e t o r i c , t h a t w h i c h o c c u r r e d a t t h e t i m e o f t h e R e n a i s s a n c e .

T h e n e w r h e t o r i c i s n o t o n l y a n a r t , b u t , a s i s i n d i c a t e d b y t h e s u b t i t l e P r o ­

f e s s e r P e r e l m a n h a s g i v e n h i s e s s a y , i t i s a l s o a t h e o r y o f p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n i n g .

F u r t h e r c o n s i d é r a t i o n o f t h i s s u b j e c t , f r o m a n o t h e r a p p r o a c h , i s g i v e n a b o v e , i n

3 1 2 P a r t T w e , i n P r o f e s s e r L e t w i n ' s a c c o u n t o f r é c e n t w o r k i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s .