Känslans syllogistik. Den enthymematiska strukturen i Aristoteles analys av pathos
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v18i68.103Nyckelord:
Aristotle, enthymeme, pathos, pistis, emotion, syllogismAbstract
Det tycks gömma sig en allvarlig motsägelse i Aristoteles Retoriken. Å ena sidan framhåller han att retorisk övertygelse alltid är beroende av tre övertalningsmedel: ethos, logos och pathos. Å andra sidan hävdar han att retorikens ”själva kropp” är enthymemet – ”ett slags syllogism” som brukar förknippas endast med ett av de tre övertalningsmedlen: logos. Denna artikel tar sin utgångspunkt i en nyläsning av analysen av pathos i Retorikens andra bok, och argumenterar för att motsägelsen i själva verket bara är skenbar, och beror på en missuppfattning av begreppet enthymem. Det visar sig nämligen vid en noggrannare läsning att även pathos framställs som resultatet av en diskursiv struktur som visserligen inte uppfyller kriterierna på en regelrätt syllogism, men som stämmer mycket väl med Aristoteles påståenden om vad som utmärker ett enthymem.
Referenser
Andersen, Øivind. I retorikkens hage, 4 utgåvan, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 2004.
Akujärvi, Johanna. ”Inledning” i Aristoteles, Retoriken, övers. Johanna Akujärvi, 7-29. Ödåkra: Retorikförlaget, 2012.
Aristoteles. Retoriken. övers. Johanna Akujärvi, Ödåkra: Retorikförlaget, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/CUDB7074
–, On Rhetoric, red. och övers. George A. Kennedy, 2 utgåvan, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
–, The “Art” of Rhetoric, övers. John Henry Freese, i Aristotle XXII, The Loeb Classical Library 193, red. Jeffrey Henderson, London: Heinemann, 1926.
–, Topica, i Aristotle, Posterior analytics. Topica, övers. Hugh Tredennick resp. E.S. Forster, i
Aristotle II, The Loeb Classical Library 391, red. Jeffrey Henderson, London & Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1960.
Bitzer, Lloyd F. “Aristotle’s Enthymeme Revisited”, i Landmark Essays on Aristotelian Rhetoric, red. Richard Leo Enos & Lois Peters Agnew, 179-191. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003059240-11
Braet, Antoine C. ”Ethos, Pathos and Logos in Aristotle’s Rhetoric: A Re-Examination”, Argumentation 6 (1992), 307–320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154696
Brinton, Alan. “Pathos and the ‘Appeal to Emotion’: An Aristotelian Analysis”, History of Philosophy Quarterly 5 (1988), 207-219.
Burnyeat, M. F. “Enthymeme: Aristotle on the Rationality of Rhetoric”, i Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red. Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, 88-115.
Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996.
Bybee, Michael D. “Logic in Rhetoric — and Vice Versa”, Philosophy & Rhetoric 26 (1993), 169-190.
Conley, Thomas. “The Enthymeme in Perspective”, Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70 (1984), 168-187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638409383687
–, Rhetoric in the European tradition, Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press, 1990.
Cooper, John M. “An Aristotelian Theory of the Emotions”, i Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red.
Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, 238-257. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996.
–, “Rhetoric, Dialectic, and the Passions”, i Aristotle. Critical Assessments. Vol IV. Politics, Rhetoric and Aesthetics, Red. Lloyd P. Gerson, 251-271. London & New York: Routledge, 1999.
Cope, Edward Meredith. An Introduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric. With Analysis Notes and Appendices, London & Cambridge: MacMillan & Company, 1867.
Cöster, Henry (1995): “Retorik mellan logik och metafysik”, Retorik och samhälle. Minnesrapport från ett nordiskt symposium om ”Retorik i samhällsplanering och offentlighet” 2-6
december 1991, red. José Luis Ramírez, 27-34, Nordiska institutet för samhällsplanering rapport 1995:2, Nordplan: Stockholm, 1995.
Duhamel, P. Albert. “The Function of Rhetoric as Effective Expression”, Journal of the History of Ideas 10 (1949), 344-356. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2707041
Eide, Tormod. Retorisk leksikon, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget (1990).
–, ”Aristotelian topos and Greek Geometry”, i Symbolae Osloensis vol. LXX, red. T. Hägg, 5-21. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, Universitetsforlaget, 1995. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00397679508590886
Enos, Richard Leo & Lois Peters Agnew. “Introduction”, i Landmark Essays on Aristotelian Rhetoric, red. Richard Leo Enos & Lois Peters Agnew, xi-xii. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998.
Eriksson, Anders. Traditions as Rhetorical Proof. Pauline Argumentation in 1 Corinthians, diss. Lund, Stockholm: Coniectanea Biblica, New Testament Series 29, Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1998.
Fortenbaugh, William W. “Aristotle’s Rhetoric on Emotions”, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 52 (1970), 40-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/agph.1970.52.1.40
–, Aristotle on Emotion. A Contribution to Philosophical Psychology, Rhetoric, Poetics, Politics and Ethics, second edition. London: Gerald Duckworth & co., 2002.
Frede, Dorothea. “Mixed Feelings in Aristotle’s Rhetoric”, i Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red.
Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, 258-285. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996.
Gabrielsen, Jonas. “Retorisk argumentationsteori i et topisk perspektiv”, Rhetorica Scandinavica 9 (1999), 30-39.
–, Topik. Ekskursioner i retorikkens toposlære, diss., Åstorp: Retorikforlaget, 2008.
Gaines, Robert N. “Aristotle’s Rhetoric and the Contemporary arts of Discourse”, i Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red. Alan G. Gross & Arthur E. Waltzer, 3-23. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2000.
Garver, Eugene. Aristotle’s Rhetoric. An Art of Character, Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press, 1994.
–, “The Contemporary Irrelevance of Aristotle’s Practical Reason” i Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red. Alan G. Gross & Arthur E. Waltzer, 57-73. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2000.
Green, Lawrence D. “Aristotelian Rhetoric, Dialectic and the Traditions of Αντίστροφος”, Rhetorica. A Journal of the History of Rhetoric 8 (1990) 5-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.1990.8.1.5
–, “Pathos”, Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, red. Thomas O. Sloane, 554-569. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Grimaldi, William M. A.”A Note on the Піστеіς in Aristotle’s Rhetoric, 1354–1356”, The American Journal of Philology 78 (1957), 188–192. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/291828
–, Aristotle Rhetoric I. A Commentary, New York: Fordham University Press, 1980.
–, Aristotle Rhetoric II. A Commentary, New York: Fordham University Press, 1989.
–, ”Rhetoric and the Philosophy of Aristotle” The Classical Journal 53 (1958), 371–375.
–, “Studies in the Philosophy of Aristotle’s Rhetoric”, i Landmark Essays on Aristotelian Rhetoric, red. Richard Leo Enos & Lois Peters Agnew, 15-159. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998.
Gross, Alan G. & Dascal, Marcelo. ”The Conceptual Unity of Aristotle’s Rhetoric”, Philosophy and Rhetoric 34 (2001), 275–291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/par.2001.0016
Hendricksen, G.L. ”The Origin and Meaning of the Ancient Characters of Style”, American Journal of Philology 26 (1905), 249–290 & 376. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/288628
Jasinski, James. Sourcebook on Rhetoric. Key Concepts in Contemporary Rhetorical Studies, Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452233222
Johnstone, Christopher Lyle. “An Aristotelian Trilogy: Ethics, Rhetoric, Politics, and the Search for Moral Truth”, Philosophy and Rhetoric 13 (1980), 1-24.
–, “Enthymeme”, Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, red. Thomas O. Sloane, 247-250. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Kennedy, George A. [“Commentary”], i Aristotle, On Rhetoric, red. och övers. George A. Kennedy, 2 utgåvan, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Kinneavy, James. “William Grimaldi – Reinterpreting Aristotle”, i Landmark Essays on Aristotelian Rhetoric, red. Richard Leo Enos & Lois Peters Agnew, 161-175. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003059240-9
Kjeldsen, Jens E. ”Billeders retorik”, i Retorikkens aktualitet. Grundbog i retorisk analyse, red. Marie Lund Klujeff & Hanne Roer, 161–196. København: Hans Reitzels, 2006.
Knape, Joachim. “Rhetorisches Pathosbegriff und literarische Pathosnarrative”, i Pathos. Zur Geschichte einer problematischen Kathegorie, red. Cornelia Zumbusch, 25-44. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1524/9783050062242.25
Kock, Christian. Ordets magt. Retorisk tænkning der holder. 1. Før 1900, Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur, 2012.
Kraus, Manfred. ”Enthymem”, i Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik band 2, red. Gert Ueding, spalt 1197–1222. Tübingen, Darmstadt: Niemeyer, 2001.
–, ”Pathos”, i Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik band 6, red. Gert Ueding, spalt 689–701. Tübingen, Darmstadt: Niemeyer, 2003.
Larsson, Hans. “Aristoteles contra Platon”, Athena. Bilder ur den hellenska kulturvärlden, 215-237, Stockholm: Hugo Gebers förlag, 1917.
Lienhard, Joseph. T. ”A Note on the Meaning of Піστеіς in Aristotle s Rhetoric”, The American Journal of philology 87 (1966), 446–454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/292756
Lunsford, Andrea A. & Ede, Lisa. ”Om distinktioner mellan klassisk och modern retorik”, Rhetorica Scandinavica nr. 68 (2014), 15-30.
Madden, Edward H. ”The Enthymeme. Crossroads of Logic, Rhetoric and Metaphysics”, The Philosophical Review 61 (1952), 368–376. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2182321
McAdon, Brad. ”Rhetoric is a Counterpart of Dialectic”, Philosophy and Rhetoric 34 (2001), 113–150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/par.2001.0007
–, “Probabilities, Signs, Necessary Signs, Idia, and Topoi: The Confusing Discussion of Materials for Enthymemes in the Rhetoric”, Philosophy and Rhetoric 36 (2003), 223-247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/par.2003.0028
McBurney, J.H., “The Place of the Enthymeme in Rhetorical Theory”, Speech Monographs 3 (1936), 49-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03637753609374841
Miller, Arthur B. & John D. Bee. “Enthymeme: Body and soul”, Philosophy & Rhetoric 5 (1972), 201-214.
Mirhady, David C. “Aristotle’s Enthymeme, thymos and Plato”, i Influences on Peripatetic Rhetoric: Essays in Honor of William W. Fortenbaugh, Philosophia Antiqua, Volume 105, 53-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004156685.i-286.13
Boston, M.A.: Brill Academic Publishers, 2007.
Newmark, Catherine. Passion – Affekt – Gefühl. Philosophische Theorien der Emotionen Zwichen Aristoteles und Kant [Paradeigmata, Bd. 29], Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2008.
Nussbaum, Martha Craven. ”Aristotle on Emotions and Rational Persuasion”, i Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red. Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, 303-323. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996.
Oele, Marjolein. “Heidegger’s Reading of Aristotle’s Concept of Pathos”, i Philosophy, Paper 18. SF, Cal.: University of San Fransisco, 2012. http://repository.usfca.edu/phil/18 (nedladdat 2014.05.14).
Perelman, Chaïm. Retorikens imperium, övers. Mats Rosengren. Ödåkra, Retorikförlaget, 2013.
Perelman, Chaïm & Lucie Olbrechts Tyteca. The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation, övers J. Wilkinson & P. Weaver. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.
Quandahl, Ellen. ”Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Reinterpreting Invention”, Rhetoric Review 4 (1986), 128–137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198609359115
Ramirez, José Luis. Skapande mening 1. En begreppsgenealogisk undersökning om rationalitet, vetenskap och planering, avhandling 13:2, diss., Stockholm: Nordiska institutet för samhälls planering, 1995.
Raphael, Sally. “Rhetoric, Dialectic, and Syllogistic Argument: Aristotle’s Position in Rhetoric I-II”, i Aristotle. Critical Assessments. Vol IV. Politics, Rhetoric and Aesthetics, red. Lloyd P.
Gerson, 238-250. London & New York: Routledge, 1999.
Rubinelli, Sara. Ars topica: the classical technique of constructing arguments from Aristotle to Cicero, introduction by David S. Levene, Argumentation library 15. Dordrecht: Springer, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9549-8
Schütrumpf, Eckart. “Non-Logical Means of Persuasion in Aristotle’s Rhetoric and Cicero’s De Oratore”, i Peripatetic Rhetoric after Aristotle, Rutgers University studies in classical humanities 6, red. William W. Fortenbaugh & David C. Mirhady, 95-110. New Brunswick, NJ.: Transaction Publishers, 1994.
Sigrell, Anders. Att övertyga mellan raderna – en retorisk studie om underförstådda inslag i modern politisk argumentation, diss., 2 utgåvan. Åstorp: Retorikförlaget, 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/XUUY4379
Slomkowski, Paul. Aristotle’s Topics, Philosophia antiqua 74. Leiden: Brill, 1997.
Solmsen, Friedrich. “Aristotle and Cicero on the Orator’s playing upon the Feelings”, Classical Philology 33 (1938), 390-404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/362176
–, ”The Aristotelian Tradition in Ancient Rhetoric”, The American Journal of Philology 62 (1941), 35–50 och 169–190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/290828
Striker, Gisela. “Emotions in context”, i Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red. Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, 286-302. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996.
Toulmin, Stephen E. The Uses of Argument, 2 utgåvan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005
Walker, Jeffrey. ”The Body of Persuasion. A Theory of the Enthymeme”, College English 56 (1994), 46–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/378216
–, “Pathos and Katharsis in ‘Aristotelian’ Rhetoric: Some implications”, i Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red. Alan G. Gross & Arthur E. Waltzer, 74-92. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2000.
Wardy, Robert. ”Mighty is the Truth and it Shall Prevail?”, i Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric, red. Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, 56-87. Berkeley, Los Angeles & London: University of California Press, 1996.
Wisse, Jakob. Ethos and Pathos from Aristotle to Cicero. Amsterdam: Adolph M. Hackert Publisher, 1989.
Wolrath Söderberg, Maria. ”Aristoteles Enthymem: slutledningsformer eller meningsskapande processer”, Rhetorica Scandinavica nr 53 (2010), 36-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52610/EZAP4535
–, Topos som meningsskapare. Retorikens topiska perspektiv på tänkande och lärande genom argumentation, Örebro Studies in Rhetoric 7, Södertörn Doctoral Dissertations 70, diss. Örebro. Ödåkra: Retorikförlaget, 2012.
##submission.downloads##
Publicerad
Referera så här
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Copyright (c) 2023 Rhetorica Scandinavica
Detta verk är licensierat under en Creative Commons Erkännande-Ickekommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0 Internationell-licens.
Open Access; CC Erkännande-IckeKommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0
