Page 132 - Žagar, Igor Ž. 2021. Four Critical Essays on Argumentation. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 132
four critical essays on argumentation
to rules, as the topoi in Aristotle’s Topics are. In other words, Cicero’s loci
mostly function as subject matter indicators and loci communes.
Which brings us a bit closer to how topoi might be used in DHA. In the
works analysed in the first chapter, the authors never construct or recon-
struct arguments from the discourse fragments they analyse—despite the
fact that they are repeatedly defining topoi as warrants connecting argu-
ments with conclusions; they just hint at them with short glosses. And since
there is no reconstruction of arguments from concrete discourse fragments
under analysis, hinting at certain topoi, referring to them or simply just
mentioning them, can only serve the purpose of ‘putting the audience in a
favourable frame of mind’. ‘Favourable frame of mind’ in our case—the use
of topoi in DHA—would mean directing a reader’s attention to a ‘common-
ly known or discussed’ topic, without explicitly phrasing or reconstruct-
ing possible arguments and conclusions. Thus, the reader can never really
know what exactly the author had in mind and what exactly he/she wanted
to say (in terms of (possible) arguments and (possible) conclusions).
In Traité de l’argumentation: La nouvelle rhétorique, published in 1958
by Ch. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, topoi are characterised by their
extreme generality, which makes them usable in every situation. It is the
degeneration of rhetoric and the lack of interest for the study of places that
has led to these unexpected consequences where ‘oratory developments’, as
Perelman ironically calls them, against fortune, sensuality, laziness, etc.,
which school exercises were repeating ad nauseam, became qualified as
commonplaces (loci, topoi), despite their extremely particular character.
By commonplaces, Perelman claims, we more and more understand what
Giambattista Vico called ‘oratory places’, in order to distinguish them from
the places treated in Aristotle’s Topics. Nowadays, commonplaces are char-
acterised by banality which does not exclude extreme specificity and par-
ticularity. These places are nothing more than Aristotelian commonplaces
applied to particular subjects, concludes Perelman.
And this is exactly what seems to be happening to the DHA approach
to topoi as well. Even more, the works quoted in the first part of the article
give the impression that DHA is not using the Aristotelian or Ciceronian
topoi, but the so-called ‘literary topoi’, conceptualized by Ernst Robert
Curtius in his Europaeische Literatur und Lateinisches Mittelalter (1990:
62–105, English translation). What is a literary topos? In a nutshell, oral
histories passed down from pre-historic societies contain literary aspects,
characters, or settings which appear again and again in stories from ancient
132
to rules, as the topoi in Aristotle’s Topics are. In other words, Cicero’s loci
mostly function as subject matter indicators and loci communes.
Which brings us a bit closer to how topoi might be used in DHA. In the
works analysed in the first chapter, the authors never construct or recon-
struct arguments from the discourse fragments they analyse—despite the
fact that they are repeatedly defining topoi as warrants connecting argu-
ments with conclusions; they just hint at them with short glosses. And since
there is no reconstruction of arguments from concrete discourse fragments
under analysis, hinting at certain topoi, referring to them or simply just
mentioning them, can only serve the purpose of ‘putting the audience in a
favourable frame of mind’. ‘Favourable frame of mind’ in our case—the use
of topoi in DHA—would mean directing a reader’s attention to a ‘common-
ly known or discussed’ topic, without explicitly phrasing or reconstruct-
ing possible arguments and conclusions. Thus, the reader can never really
know what exactly the author had in mind and what exactly he/she wanted
to say (in terms of (possible) arguments and (possible) conclusions).
In Traité de l’argumentation: La nouvelle rhétorique, published in 1958
by Ch. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, topoi are characterised by their
extreme generality, which makes them usable in every situation. It is the
degeneration of rhetoric and the lack of interest for the study of places that
has led to these unexpected consequences where ‘oratory developments’, as
Perelman ironically calls them, against fortune, sensuality, laziness, etc.,
which school exercises were repeating ad nauseam, became qualified as
commonplaces (loci, topoi), despite their extremely particular character.
By commonplaces, Perelman claims, we more and more understand what
Giambattista Vico called ‘oratory places’, in order to distinguish them from
the places treated in Aristotle’s Topics. Nowadays, commonplaces are char-
acterised by banality which does not exclude extreme specificity and par-
ticularity. These places are nothing more than Aristotelian commonplaces
applied to particular subjects, concludes Perelman.
And this is exactly what seems to be happening to the DHA approach
to topoi as well. Even more, the works quoted in the first part of the article
give the impression that DHA is not using the Aristotelian or Ciceronian
topoi, but the so-called ‘literary topoi’, conceptualized by Ernst Robert
Curtius in his Europaeische Literatur und Lateinisches Mittelalter (1990:
62–105, English translation). What is a literary topos? In a nutshell, oral
histories passed down from pre-historic societies contain literary aspects,
characters, or settings which appear again and again in stories from ancient
132
