Content deleted Content added
m remove Erik9bot category,outdated, tag and general fixes |
clean up |
||
| (43 intermediate revisions by 37 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Canon of rhetoric}}
{{Rhetoric}}
{{italic title}}
{{Original research|date=January 2024}} '''{{lang|la|Dispositio}}''' is the system used for the organization of arguments in the context of Western classical [[rhetoric]]. The word is [[Latin]], and can be translated as "organization" or "arrangement
It is the second of five canons of classical rhetoric (the first being [[inventio]], and the remaining being [[elocutio]], [[memoria]], and [[pronuntiatio]]) that concern the crafting and delivery of speeches and writing.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Cicero |first1=Marcus Tullius |title=Brutus or History of Famous Orators |url=https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/9776/pg9776-images.html#id00069 |via=Project Gutenberg |access-date=21 November 2021 |language=English |format=eBook |date=15 November 2011 |quote=But this deficiency was supplied in them by an elaborate knowledge of the art of Speaking; and there was not one of them who was totally unqualified in any of the five [Footnote: Invention, Disposition, Elocution, Memory, and Pronunciation.] principal parts of which it is composed; for whenever this is the case, (and it matters not in which of those parts it happens) it intirely incapacitates a man to shine as an Orator.}}</ref>
The first part of any rhetorical exercise was to discover the proper arguments to use, which was done
== Aristotle ==
[[Aristotle]] defined two essential parts of a discourse: the statement of the case and the proof of the case. For example, in a legal argument, a prosecutor must first declare the charges against the defendant and provide the relevant facts; then he must present the evidence that proves guilt. Aristotle allowed that in practice most discourse also requires an introduction and a conclusion.{{Citation needed|date=January 2024}}
== Latin rhetoric ==
Later writers on rhetoric, such as [[Cicero]] and [[Quintilian]], refined this organizational scheme
* the introduction, or ''[[Exordium (rhetoric)|
* the statement of the case, or ''narratio''
*
* the proof of the case, or ''confirmatio''
* the refutation of possible opposing arguments, or ''confutatio''
* the conclusion, or ''peroratio''
While this structure might appear to be
▲* the statement of the case, or ''narratio'' -- Quintilian pointed out about narratio that: "We shall for instance represent a person accused of theft as covetous, accused of adultery as lustful, accused of homicide as rash, or attribute the opposite qualities to these persons if we are defending them; further we must do the same with place, time and the like." An example of narratio: Hate speech has occurred on our campus. If hate speech occurs on our campus, it does not occur often. Hate speech seldom occurs on our campus.
Within each major part, there were additional tactics that might be employed. For instance, a prosecutor might
▲* the outline of the major points in the argument, or ''divisio'' (sometimes known as ''partitio'') -- It has two functions: names the issues in dispute and lists the arguments to be used in the order they will appear.
▲* the proof of the case, or ''confirmatio'' -- It confirms or validates the material given in the narratio and partitio.
▲* the refutation of possible opposing arguments, or ''confutatio'' -- If the rhetor anticipates that certain people in his audience may disagree his or her speech, he or she can be prepared to refute the argument that could possibly be presented in opposition to his original speech.
Finally, ''dispositio'' was also
▲* the conclusion, or ''peroratio'' -- Cicero taught that a rhetor can do three things in this step: sum up his or her arguments, cast anyone who disagrees with him or her in a negative light, and arouse sympathy for himself or herself, his or her clients, or his or her case.
===''Exordium''===
▲While this structure might appear to be highly rigid (and certainly some writers on the subject were overly pedantic), it was in practice a flexible model. Cicero and Quintilian, for example, encouraged writers to rearrange the structure when it strengthened their case; for instance, if the opposing arguments were known to be powerful, it might be better to place the refutation before the proof.
The ''exordium'' ({{IPAc-en|ɛ|ɡ|ˈ|z|ɔr|d|i|ə|m}}; meaning "beginning" in [[Latin]]; from ''exordiri'', meaning "to begin") was the introductory portion of an oration. The term is Latin and the Greek equivalent was termed the ''[[proem]]'' or ''prooimion''.
In the ''exordium'', the orator states the purpose of the discourse. In doing this, they need to consider several things:
▲Within each major part, there were additional tactics that might be employed. For instance, a prosecutor might sum up his case with forceful repetition of his main points using a technique known as ''[[accumulatio]]''. The defense attorney in the same case might use a different approach in his summation.
* What kind of cause is he presenting? For instance, is it an honorable cause (defense of a hero) or a dishonorable one (defense of a murderer)?
▲Finally, ''dispositio'' was also seen as an iterative process, particularly in conjunction with ''[[inventio]]''. The very process of organizing arguments might lead to the need to discover and research new ones. An orator would refine his arguments and their organization until they were properly arranged. He would then proceed on to those areas that we generally associate with rhetoric today — the development of the style and delivery of the arguments.
* Should a direct beginning be favoured, or should the beginning be more subtle and indirect?
* In what manner ought the speaker to proceed (e.g., humorously or seriously)?
* The speaker should introduce their own character or credentials, so as to make the audience predisposed to believing their arguments.
* If required, or possible, the speaker might also question the character or credentials of his opponent.
* Lastly, the speaker must avoid certain faults in the introduction. For example, this excerpt from the Roman ''[[Rhetorica ad Herennium]]'' lists several faults:
<blockquote>In the Introduction of a cause we must make sure that our style is temperate and that the words are in current use, so that the discourse seems unprepared. An Introduction is faulty if it can be applied as well to a number of causes; that is called a banal Introduction. Again, an Introduction which the adversary can use no less well is faulty, and that is called a common Introduction. That Introduction, again, is faulty which the opponent can turn to his own use against you. And again that is faulty which has been composed in too laboured a style, or is too long; and that which does not appear to have grown out of the cause itself in such a way to have an intimate connection with the Statement of Facts; and, finally, that which fails to make the hearer well disposed or receptive or attentive.
: —''Rhetorica ad Herennium'', I. vii, 11, trans. Harry Caplan, Loeb Classical Library, 1954.)</blockquote>
Crowley, Sharon and Debra Hawhee. Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students. New York: Pearson Education, 2004.▼
In short, the ''exordium'' was the portion of the discourse in which the orator would prepare the audience to hear his arguments in a favorable mindset. "An exordium can serve different kinds of functions in the differing species of rhetoric, but in all of them some of the major themes of the coming discourse will be announced in advance".<ref>{{Cite book|title=Letters and Homilies For Hellenized Christians |volume=II |last=Witherington |first=Ben III |publisher=IVP Academic |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-8308-2933-0 |location=Downers Grove, Illinois |pages=297}}</ref>
===''Peroratio''===
The ''peroratio'' ("peroration"), as the final part of a speech, had two main purposes in classical rhetoric: to remind the audience of the main points of the speech (''recapitulatio'') and to influence their emotions (''affectus''). The role of the peroration was defined by Greek writers on rhetoric, who termed it ''epilogos''; but it is most often associated with Roman orators, who made frequent use of emotional appeals. A famous example was the speech of [[Marcus Antonius Orator|Marcus Antonius]] in defence of [[Manius Aquillius (consul 101 BC)|Aquillius]], during which Antonius tore open the tunic of Aquillius to reveal his battle scars.<ref>[[Cicero]], ''[[De Oratore]]'', [http://pages.pomona.edu/~cmc24747/sources/cic_web/de_or_2.htm 2.xlvii.194]</ref>
During the first century B.C. it was common for two or more speakers to appear on each side in major court cases. In such cases it was considered an honour to be asked to deliver the peroration.<ref>Cicero, ''[[Brutus (Cicero)|Brutus]]'', [http://www.attalus.org/old/brutus3.html#190 190]</ref>
==References==
▲* Crowley, Sharon and Debra Hawhee. ''Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students''. New York: Pearson Education, 2004.
{{Reflist}}
==External links==
* [[Aristotle]], ''[[Rhetoric (Aristotle)|Rhetorica]]'', [http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/rhetoric.3.iii.html Book 3, Chapter 19]
* [[Quintilian]], ''[[Institutio Oratoria]]'', [https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Quintilian/Institutio_Oratoria/6A*.html#1 Book 6, Chapter 1]
* [[Cicero]], ''[[De Inventione]]'', [https://web.archive.org/web/20121126091345/http://www.classicpersuasion.org/pw/cicero/dnv1-4.htm#98 Book 1, Sections 98-109]
{{Philosophy topics}}
{{authority control}}
[[Category:Rhetoric]]
| |||