The Interpretation of the Being-There of Human Beings [125–127]

the affirmative” or “discourse in the negative,” for or against. ἀεὶ γὰρ οἱ ἰδίᾳ συμβουλεύοντες καὶ οἱ κοινῇ δημηγοροῦντες τούτων θάτερον ποιοῦσιν.62 “Both those who are deliberating about what concerns themselves, as well as those who take counsel about public matters, remain within these two possibilities.” (2) In judicial discourse: (a) κατηγορία, (b) ἀπολογία.63 Κατηγορεῖν: “to blame a matter on someone,” “to say that he has it on his conscience,” “to accuse”; or ἀπολογεῖν: “to acquit oneself of,” “to defend oneself.” (3) In exhibitive λόγος: (a) ἔπαινος, (b) ψόγος,64 “praise” or “rebuke.”

The three distinct εἴδη along with their possibilities of outcome are summarily characterized with respect to χρόνος; they are distinguished by the time-character of that about which they speak. (1) The χρόνος for deliberation is ὁ μέλλων,65 “the near future,” “the upcoming,” “what will be,” at which deliberation aims; (2) the χρόνος of the δικαζόμενος is ὁ γενόμενος,66 “what has happened.” (3) ὁ παρών,67 “what is present.”

Accordingly, there are domains spoken of that succinctly characterize the aspects that we have already recognized. Ὁ μέλλων χρόνος is something that is conducive to the why of being of being-with-one-another, to being in the πόλις. The being-character of the about-which of the συμβουλευτικός is the συμφέρον as opposed to βλαβερόν,68 of the λόγος δικανικός, the δίκαιον as opposed to the ἄδικον;69 the about which of the λόγος ἐπιδεικτικός is the καλόν as opposed to the αἰσχρόν.70

Every λόγος has, in various modes, these three πίστεις. Aristotle begins the more precise explication of the πίστεις with the ἐνθύμημα, with the “exhibiting of something.” He summarizes the characters thus: ταύτας ἐστὶν λαβεῖν τοῦ συλλογίσασθαι δυναμένου καὶ τοῦ θεωρῆσαι περὶ τὰ ἤθη καὶ περὶ τὰς ἀρετὰς καὶ τρίτον τοῦ περὶ τὰ πάθη.71 The πίστεις become present in these aspects. Accordingly, a δυνάμενος who wants to dedicate himself to rhetoric must apprehend these three. The συλλοίσασθαι emphasizes more explicitly another possibility beside the θεωρῆσαι. Precisely, the contextualized-ability-to-discourse requires a seeing, an understanding of what speaks for the matter.

β. Rhetorical Speaking with παράδειγμα and ἐνθύμημα as Paralleling Dialectical Speaking with ἐπαγωγή and συλλογισμός

Because the various λόγοι are oriented toward being-with-one-another, “one can treat rhetoric as παραφυές of διαλεκτική and περὶ τὰ ἤθη πραγματεία,

62. Rhet. Α 3, 1358 b 9 sq.

63. Rhet. Α 3, 1358 b 11.

64. Rhet. Α 3, 1358 b 12 sq.

65. Rhet. Α 3, 1358 b 14.

66. Rhet. Α 3, 1358 b 15 sq.

67. Rhet. Α 3, 1358 b 17 sq.

68. Rhet. Α 3, 1358 b 22.

69. Rhet. Α 3, 1358 b 25.

70. Ibid.

71. Rhet. Α 2, 1356 a 20 sqq.

Page generated by BasConAriPhiSteller.EXE