Humanistic Mathematics Network Journal Issue 20 Article 28 7-1-1999 An Informal History of Classical Rhetoric for Mathematicians (Plato and Aristotle) Phillip Keith St. Cloud State University Sandra Z. Keith St. Cloud State University Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/hmnj Part of the Intellectual History Commons, Logic and Foundations Commons, and the Logic and Foundations of Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Keith, Phillip and Keith, Sandra Z. (1999) "An Informal History of Classical Rhetoric for Mathematicians (Plato and Aristotle)," Humanistic Mathematics Network Journal: Iss. 20, Article 28. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/hmnj/vol1/iss20/28 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Claremont at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in Humanistic Mathematics Network Journal by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. An Informal History of Classical Rhetoric for Mathematicians (Plato and Aristotle) Philip Keith Sandy Z. Keith St. Cloud State University, MN Rhetoric, “the art of persuasion,” gets a bad rap among advantage for plaintiffs and accused, and as in courts workers in the mathematical sciences. This is unfor- today, the expression of pain and suffering would tunate, since although mathematics is concerned pri- carry a lot of weight. Not surprisingly, some entre- marily with the demonstration of formal truth, math- preneurial individuals offered lessons in speaking to ematicians do live in the world and need to concern get maximum benefit from these situations. The best themselves with persuading students, business agents known of these individuals are Corax and Tisias, to and others not on the mathematical team of the im- whom the art of rhetoric is traced by Aristotle. portance of their enterprise. The natural revulsion among keepers of the flame of formal truth for the Imagine the typical case. The “jury” of 50 men sits in dirty instruments and forms of public persuasion is a an open theater of sorts while the plaintiff explains handicap (not fatal yet, perhaps, but a handicap none- how his brother was beaten to death and his home theless) in attracting students and obtaining public seized by the defendant. In his complaint he goes into support. Thus, a brief history of the origins of rheto- great detail about the agonizing pain his brother suf- ric and its relation to the development of logic—math- fered, the misery of his brother’s wife and children in ematical and otherwise—can be useful in providing a the loss of their father, the humiliation of their loss of view of the relation between those two integral arts privilege and income, the jealous glee of the execu- of “fixing” belief, to use the term favored by the phi- tors of the forfeiture and the illicit pleasure they take losopher and mathematician C.S. Peirce. in the property to which they have no right—all of this aimed at arousing the active sympathy and out- Rhetoric had its institutional roots in the political chaos rage of the jury. The defendant parries in the same in Greece around 400 B.C. following Sparta’s defeat terms, pointing to injustices committed by the dead of Athens and the temporary collapse of democracy. brother that earned him his fate, the insult and pain Although the models of expression favored by rheto- caused by the present claim, the well-known skuldug- ricians trace back to Homer and the oral tradition of gery of the plaintiff, and how the misery of the heroic action and expression, the availability of tutor- defendant’s wife, children and father was due to the ing in rhetoric is tied to the period of the restoration wretchedness of the home forfeited to the defendant of democracy after the oligarchic tyranny following which has since been transformed through consider- the defeat of Athens. During the tyranny, arbitrary able effort, expense and good will within the last ten seizure of property and assassination were common, years into a location of public hospitality. and, as in recent history in South Africa and Central America, injustices filled lists waiting for redress. Since such skill in arguing had a substantial value, it became a major part of the educational framework. With the restoration of the democracy, courts were Teachers of the youth of Athens were expected to pro- established to hear claims and grievances. These vide experience and training to prepare men to de- courts, in the Athenian pattern, did not have estab- fend themselves against complaint, much as it was lished officers, such as judges, prosecutors, and li- expected that young men would learn to defend them- censed defense lawyers. They were made up of groups selves with weapons. It is hardly surprising then that of citizens—as many as fifty—who listened to the the youthful Plato, in observing such processes, would grievances of citizens and the defenses of those ac- be appalled that this could be considered a form of cused, and delivered judgment on the spot. In this situ- Justice, a search for Truth. And so rhetoric as an art ation, cleverness in speaking would provide a strong became the target of special scorn as an educational 48 Humanistic Mathematics Network Journal #20 discipline because of its claim to discover truth and simple yet profound set of categories, Aristotle estab- further justice. In his dialogues on rhetoric, specifi- lishes an observation that speech situations are either cally the Gorgias and Phaedrus, Plato has Socrates at- judicial, deliberative, or ceremonial (epedeictic). Ju- tack common rhetorical practice as training in mak- dicial speech aims at accusing someone of crimes they ing the worst appear the better cause. This competed have committed in the past; deliberative speech aims with training in reasoning, which he called dialectic. at recommending policy for the future; and ceremo- (Although this is a yawing term, cruising across philo- nial speech aims at praising or blaming a person for sophical trade routes, it can generally be taken to mean their character. These are the only types of speech that discussion logic, or finding questions for exploratory operate with the public at large. Within any of these discussion.) Plato wanted to ask questions and shape categories (think: rows), one may use one of three dif- definitions to clarify and comprehend Truth, Justice, ferent appeals (think: columns) that are grounded in Virtue; in his Academy the mode of dialectic was the the speaking situation. One may appeal to the feel- foundation of education. ings and perceptions of the audience (pathos), as in the court speeches that so appalled Plato. But one may Fortunately for the western world, one of Plato’s stu- also base an appeal on one’s own character or reli- dents and teaching assistants at the Academy was ability (ethos), or on the argument or evidence (logos). Aristotle, who took a differ- In response to Plato’s iden- ent view. Aristotle was in- tification of rhetoric with terested not just in the es- ❝ basically a single mode of sential truth and falsity of ...it is necessary to distinguish between persua- speech (judicial aim with methods of thinking and sion relative to the community at large, and emotional appeal), knowing, he was also inter- persuasion within a field of shared assumptions Aristotle’s definition of ested in describing how rhetoric is a full grid with in a particular investigation... things worked, practically. lists of terms expanding Aristotle’s Rhetoric seems to each of the nine cells of the have been an outgrowth of grid. Aiming at comprehen- his discussions of rhetoric at the Academy. (Plato must siveness of description, he expands the audience ap- have decided that the Academy needed to have in- peal, for instance, from appeals to anger and sympa- struction in rhetoric to attract students, but he was thetic sadness to a full description of the kinds of as- darned if he was going to do that, so he gave the job sociations and perspectives different audiences tend to this talented junior staffer.) Aristotle’s approach was to share. One might say that in so doing, he wrote the neither to teach merely the Coraxian tricks, or critique first descriptive psychology. For example, for old men, the practice of such tricks, but to ask: what kind of happiness takes the form of protection or successful thing is rhetoric? And his explanation in the Rhetoric children while for young men it might be challenge and the larger Organon, of which it is essentially a part, or opportunity to achieve honor . So if you are speak- can be read as an answer to Plato’s concerns, an an- ing to an audience of senior citizens, be aware of this swer that in a sense follows Plato’s method. difference in shaping your material. Young men tend to pay more active attention to personal slight than “Plato!” he seems to say, “hold on a minute—you are old men, who feel more secure in their established getting some things mixed up! First of all, you define reputations. This sort of listing-out description easily rhetoric in terms of the example of these court pro- expands into an outline that fills several hundred ceedings. That’s far too narrow a definition. Rhetoric pages without very much analysis or detailed devel- should be described in terms of its situation and its opment. appeal. Those court proceedings are examples of speech in judicial situations emphasizing an appeal But defining rhetoric is only part of Aristotle’s re- to audience emotion. The jury isn’t trained, they have sponse to Plato. Secondly he points out that it is nec- no standards of justice, no code to enforce, so natu- essary to distinguish between persuasion relative to rally the most effective appeal is to their sympathy the community at large, and persuasion within a field and anger.