Page 28 - Žagar, Igor Ž. 2021. Four Critical Essays on Argumentation. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 28
four critical essays on argumentation
29 in the Rhetoric.14 Two of the most important sub-types of his typology,
sub-types that were widely used throughout history, are:
(a) topoi concerning opposites, and
(b) topoi concerning semantic relationships of ‘more and less’.
For an understanding of how topoi are supposed to function, here are
two notorious examples:
Ad a
If action Y is desirable in relation to object X, the contrary action Y’
should be disapproved of in relation to the same object X.
This is a topos, as Aristotle would have formulated it. And what fol-
lows is its application to a concrete subject matter that can serve as a gener-
al premise in an enthymeme (topos cannot):
‘If it is desirable to act in favor of one’s friends, it should be disap-
proved of to act against one’s friends.’
Ad b
If a predicate can be ascribed to an object X more likely than to an ob-
ject Y, and the predicate is truly ascribed to Y, then the predicate can even
more likely be ascribed to X.
Once more, this is a topos. And what follows is its application to a con-
crete subject matter that can serve as a general premise in an enthymeme
(topos cannot):
‘Whoever beats his father, even more likely beats his neighbour.’
We should now be able to distinguish two ways in which Aristotle
frames topoi in his Topics. Even more, topoi in the Topics would usually be
twofold; they would consist of an instruction, and on the basis of this in-
struction, a rule would be formulated. For example:
(1) Instructions (precepts): ‘Check whether C is D.’
(2) Rules (laws): ‘If C is D, then B will be A.’
Instructions would usually check the relations between the four pred-
icables (definition, genus, property, accident), and, subsequently, a kind of
14 The 29 topoi in the Rhetoric cannot all be found among the 300 topoi from the Top-
ics. There is a long-standing debate about where these 29 topoi come from, and how
the list was composed. Rubinelli (2009: 71–73) suggests that their more or less ‘uni-
versal applicability’ may be the criterion.
28
29 in the Rhetoric.14 Two of the most important sub-types of his typology,
sub-types that were widely used throughout history, are:
(a) topoi concerning opposites, and
(b) topoi concerning semantic relationships of ‘more and less’.
For an understanding of how topoi are supposed to function, here are
two notorious examples:
Ad a
If action Y is desirable in relation to object X, the contrary action Y’
should be disapproved of in relation to the same object X.
This is a topos, as Aristotle would have formulated it. And what fol-
lows is its application to a concrete subject matter that can serve as a gener-
al premise in an enthymeme (topos cannot):
‘If it is desirable to act in favor of one’s friends, it should be disap-
proved of to act against one’s friends.’
Ad b
If a predicate can be ascribed to an object X more likely than to an ob-
ject Y, and the predicate is truly ascribed to Y, then the predicate can even
more likely be ascribed to X.
Once more, this is a topos. And what follows is its application to a con-
crete subject matter that can serve as a general premise in an enthymeme
(topos cannot):
‘Whoever beats his father, even more likely beats his neighbour.’
We should now be able to distinguish two ways in which Aristotle
frames topoi in his Topics. Even more, topoi in the Topics would usually be
twofold; they would consist of an instruction, and on the basis of this in-
struction, a rule would be formulated. For example:
(1) Instructions (precepts): ‘Check whether C is D.’
(2) Rules (laws): ‘If C is D, then B will be A.’
Instructions would usually check the relations between the four pred-
icables (definition, genus, property, accident), and, subsequently, a kind of
14 The 29 topoi in the Rhetoric cannot all be found among the 300 topoi from the Top-
ics. There is a long-standing debate about where these 29 topoi come from, and how
the list was composed. Rubinelli (2009: 71–73) suggests that their more or less ‘uni-
versal applicability’ may be the criterion.
28
