Ancient rhetoric

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While nowadays rhetoric is primarily understood to mean speech training and the art of speaking, the ancient rhetoric dealt with the entire process of knowledge acquisition, knowledge processing and knowledge transfer. So it is reminiscent of what is nowadays understood by the humanities methodology. For the young Greeks and Romans, rhetoric was a kind of general science propaedeutic that prepared them, among other things, for work as a lawyer or politician.

Rhetoric in Homer

The rhetoric has its beginnings in antiquity : For the first time people - verifiable in text sources - think about eloquence, how it can be learned and used. Homer , the Greek poet, is considered to be the creator of rhetoric , since he was born as early as the 8th century BC. . AD in his works, the " Iliad " and " Odyssey has processed" first examples rhetoric in the form of speeches. The rhetoric is used in various ways, be it in deliberations of leading men, in court hearings or in army and popular assemblies . The importance of Homer for rhetoric is already clear from the fact that the first doctrines and rules of rhetoric arose in relation to his works.

The beginnings of rhetoric in Sicily

One can see the proven birthplace of rhetoric in Sicily , because only the political changes made it possible for rhetoric to develop freely. By abolishing tyranny (466 BC), Syracuse gave rhetoric the chance to establish itself in public life. The resulting political power vacuum has made public political discussion a necessity. Now conflicts of interest are carried out in public speech. One thinks concretely and in a theoretically reflected form about how to give a speech in front of an auditorium as convincingly as possible. Korax was one of the first to use this new art for himself and is considered to be the first rhetorician and teacher of rhetoric in the time after the tyranny . His disciple Teisias should also be mentioned, as he is the author of the first rhetorical textbook containing various sample speeches. Thus Korax and Teisias are considered to be the founders of rhetoric.

Rhetoric among the sophists

After an upheaval in the state system had also taken place in Athens - the aristocratic regiment had been abolished and the first early form of democracy had developed - rhetoric in the form of political speech was used to form political will. The emergence of democracy meant that there were popular assemblies in which public affairs were discussed. The speaker or petitioner in the people's assembly was also known as a "rhetor". In order to be convincing in front of such an auditorium, one naturally had to master the art of speaking. In the wake of these changes, many non-aristocratic citizens were now also interested in education in order to be able to participate actively in public life and politics. The more democratic state system is therefore one of the factors responsible for the heyday of rhetoric.

As a result of these developments, one spiritual movement comes to the fore, the sophistry . The sophists , also known as wisdom teachers, wanted to teach their students political and social knowledge through their work as teachers and to impart skills to them that would enable them to succeed in private life and in political life. The methods chosen to achieve the desired goals were techné rhetoriké, the art of persuasive speech, and dialectics , i.e. the methodical approach of always looking at a certain issue from different perspectives.

The sophists first appeared as traveling teachers. Later in the 4th century BC They founded more and more schools in certain places such as Athens. The sophistry is also the great enlightenment movement of the 4th and 5th centuries BC. The prevailing mystical world order is replaced by pure reason, and at the same time people - instead of nature - are brought into the center of interest. The established traditions are questioned and no longer accepted as unquestionable and irrefutable.

The consequence of these new views was that either an absolute relativism emerged, since in the sense of the sophists there was only "probable" and all points of view were equal and thus "relative", or a deep skepticism that arose from the knowledge that nothing certain to know or to be able to recognize nothing for sure.

First of all , Gorgias von Leontinoi (480-380 BC) should be mentioned, who lived in 427 BC. BC comes to Athens and is a student of Teisias . He is therefore considered to be the link between the beginnings of rhetoric in Sicily and Athens. He was of the opinion that anything could be enforced with the help of rhetoric; he was, so to speak, convinced of the omnipotence of rhetoric. According to Winfried Böhm , he represented a formal - rhetorical upbringing that tried to make the pupil a capable speaker. He is also responsible for the creation of art prose.

From Protagoras of Abdera (481–411 BC) comes the famous sentence: “Man is the measure of all things, of whom they are, that they are, and of those who are not, that they are not” known as the "Homo-Mensura-Set". With this he took the view that one must always start from the (respective) person and therefore there is no absolute truth, but only a relative, not an objective, but only a subjective one, for the (respective) person, in such a way that not “man” (in general) is the measure - that would still be a kind of general standard - but the respective individual person. So, according to Protagoras, there are as many views on a problem as there are people. He is therefore also seen as the founder of dialectics.

One of the most important rhetoric school founders was Isocrates (436–338 BC), who was a student of Gorgias and clearly set himself apart from his colleagues in his speech “Against the Sophists”. He sees "the rhetoric less than a craft because one of the philosophy undertook education teaching ...". Isocrates did not want to use rhetoric to persuade his listeners to take certain actions, but rather to “awaken, admonish, warn and advise” them. So he already had a moral and ethical idea in his teachings and thus differs from other sophists, for whom the power of persuasion or persuasion is in the foreground. He was one of the first to make the conversation the basis of knowledge with regard to the two problems of sophistry, relativism and the resulting skepticism, in which it is the task of the people involved to find the "more likely".

The critical assessment of rhetoric by the philosophers

“From Gorgias to Anaximenes , from Socrates to Aristotle : the antagonism of sophistic challenge and philosophical reaction is about a century long, from 430 to 330 BC. BC, the moving force of the history of Greek education ... “. Under this aspect, as Fuhrmann has described, one must understand the dispute between the philosophers and the sophists, namely as one that is fruitful for the sciences. Because the exchange of ideas or the scientific dispute is of enormous importance for the progress within the teachings, since it can lead to new approaches.

Beginning with Socrates (470–399 BC), the rhetoric of the sophists is viewed very critically. A different view of rhetoric emerged, so to speak, which was mainly represented by Socrates and his pupil Plato (427–347 BC). In contrast to the education of the sophists, there is the dialogue developed by Socrates, which can also be understood as an educational approach.

The Socratic method is designed so that the student comes to the truth independently in a dialogue. Socrates succeeds in doing this by first demonstrating his ignorance to the pupil and then discussing the facts dialectically in a dialogue, in order to then lead the pupil to independent thinking and knowledge through skillful questions; this procedure is called maeutics , which is a kind of “spiritual obstetrics”. Another difference is that Socrates - unlike the sophists - does not start from the relativism of different views and opinions, but from the "only true", the "ideas", like his pupil Plato, who is one of the most violent critics of the sophists was.

In his work Gorgias, Plato's point of view becomes clear. He not only turns away from the sophistic rhetoric, but condemns it, which is a complete mirage. Today's negative meaning of the term "sophistry", which is sometimes misused as an insult, goes back to him. Nowadays, “sophistry” is generally understood to mean “sophistication” or “sham knowledge”, which has little to do with the ideas of the sophists of antiquity.

Plato denies rhetoric its scientific status and sees it only as a method for dialectic, as he explains in his work Phaedrus . In addition, with Plato, moral and ethical principles become essential for rhetoric. He accuses the sophists of having placed the "interest in effect" before the "interest in truth", ie mere persuasion is the goal of sophistic rhetoric and not the finding of truth which he (Plato) and his teacher Socrates set as the highest maxim . In Plato's rhetoric, there is no room for emotions , which the sophists, on the other hand, consciously used, because he was of the opinion that only truth alone can convince.

Plato thus clearly points to the dual nature of rhetoric, which consists in the fact that one can achieve good with a speech for noble motives, but that also, if the motivation of the speaker is low, bad can be caused. But the moral objections were not the only reason for Plato's criticism of the sophists. A financial interest was also of great importance. Due to the great competition among the various schools, Plato hoped that his negative advertising would attract a larger number of students.

His student Aristotle (384–322 BC), however, does not have the same radical view of sophistry. In his book téchne rhetoriké he tries to combine logic with practical psychology , that is, a good speaker has to recognize the mind of his audience in order to be able to adjust to it, but he can only convince if he has sufficient knowledge of the Area he is talking about. Aristotle's rhetoric is therefore more oriented towards argumentation, i.e. more towards how the speaker can make his arguments convincingly.

One can therefore say that Aristotle relativizes the critical standpoint of his teacher somewhat and brings the philosophy closer to sophistry. In contrast to Plato, he assigns rhetoric the rank as an independent scientific discipline and sees it as a counterpart to dialectics.

The fundamental difference to Plato lies in the different understanding of the concept of truth. Aristotle's rhetoric is a theory of opinion-based knowledge, probable conclusions, and believable reasoning, so, in contrast to Plato's absolute concept of truth, he assumes unchangeable and changeable truths. He described the latter as “the probable”, which is gained from the knowledge of theoretical knowledge. The former (the immutable truths), on the other hand, is based on knowledge from practical knowledge. This difference is also evident in the criteria for a good speech. While Aristotle's persuasiveness and credibility are decisive for the effectiveness of a speech, Plato only focuses on conveying the truth and asserting it with the audience.

According to Aristotle, the task of eloquence is "... to recognize the convincing basis of every thing, as in all other sciences", ie to see the probable.

Rhetoric among the Romans

The "entry" of rhetoric into the Roman Empire is connected with the rise of Rome to a world power during the 2nd century BC. The Roman Empire grows bigger and bigger and as a result of the Punic Wars it is also increasingly confronted with Hellenistic thinking.

The Greek culture had great influence on the Romans, as you can see on writing and language as well as the crafts and the arts of the Romans; Last but not least, the Greek school system was also adopted. Correspondingly, rhetoric is also increasingly practiced among the Romans. The numerous sophists and philosophers who worked as rhetoric teachers contributed to its spread.

Even if Roman culture arose primarily through appropriation and imitation of Greek culture and developed less of itself, there is still a big difference. In much of what the Romans did, the main concern was the practical use and gladly forego the aesthetic aspect , which played a certain role in Greek rhetoric.

In rhetoric, the Romans saw above all the practical. The political utility of rhetoric was recognized and used to train political leaders. In addition, there was a wide range of applications. The Senate , which had the power to decide, discussed the issues at stake in lengthy debates. Legal processes were also carried out in public at the forum. Due to this political order, rhetoric became an important part of the life of the Romans.

The climax of Roman rhetoric can be seen in its outstanding speaker Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BC). He was a man with the greatest general education , he studied law , rhetoric, literature and philosophy in Rome. Due to his experience as a speaker on the political and judicial level, he saw his ideal of education embodied in the perfect speaker ("orator perfectus"). His endeavor was therefore to combine rhetoric with philosophy. This break between the two sciences had not always existed: “ There used to be a holistic education in which philosophy and rhetoric were also connected, until Socrates brought about this separation and the speakers and the philosophers wanted nothing to do with each other. The former unity has thus been a rhetorical unity, and whoever restores it satisfies the oratory ideal ”. Thus Cicero called for a holistic education for his orator perfectus, the perfect speaker, which is described by three criteria:

  1. natura: the natural abilities of humans such as intelligence , flexibility and physical assets
  2. ars: knowledge of the theoretical foundations of rhetoric
  3. exercitatio: the exercises necessary to train the mental and physical abilities that are important for speech.

In addition, the perfect speaker must be able to talk about any topic, i.e. also be educated in philosophy, in order to justify the speaker in his function as an actor, if not as a shaper of the truth. His speeches may only be used in the service of good and can only be accounted for in this way, which makes it clear that ethics has a high priority at Cicero. As already mentioned, he wanted to restore the unity between the sciences (rhetoric and philosophy). This connection becomes clear in his work De Oratore , which - like the works of Plato - is written in dialogue form and illuminates the relationship between philosophy and rhetoric.

He takes on the theories of Aristotle and Isocrates, on the one hand the philosophical - reflective approach and on the other hand the technical-practical approach to rhetoric, and tries to unite both in his rhetoric.

From the time of Julius Caesar's dictatorship in 46 BC. The same thing happened as before in Greece . Such political upheavals have robbed rhetoric of its political status. The political discussion as it had been cultivated in the popular assembly was no longer possible. Nevertheless, the rhetoric survived this time, it was further taught in the upper general education of the middle and upper classes as the art of eloquence.

Quintilian (35–96) must be named as the second great rhetorician of the Roman Empire . He is considered the last great rhetorician of antiquity. In his works there is a return to Cicero and for the first time pedagogical elements flow into the rhetoric.

He was the first state-paid teacher of rhetoric in Rome. He carried out this teaching activity for 20 years and wrote down these experiences in his most important work, "Institutio oratoria", the instruction in the art of speaking. As with Cicero, the perfect speaker is embodied in him by the eloquent, wise man and at the same time the virtuous man. This is why Quintilian focuses on character development, which is why training to be a speaker must be subject to very high ethical and moral standards. In this respect he was even more anxious to give eloquence a moral foundation than his model Cicero.

He creates an aspect that is new to the point of being at the same time in his writings the didactic path by means of a system of education from children to adult speakers. The main focus is on teaching the child, which should be structured according to the following criteria: The child's interest should be aroused and the child's individuality should be encouraged, taking into account the level of development; Learning materials are encouraged, and the child is to be brought up to be independent. Quintilian is the first author to establish a close relationship between education and rhetoric .

literature

  • Winfried Böhm : History of Pedagogy. Beck, Munich 2004.
  • Manfred Fuhrmann : The ancient rhetoric. Artemis, Munich 1984. (6th, revised edition. Artemis & Winkler, Mannheim 2011)
  • Herbert Genzmer : Rhetoric. The art of speech. Dumont, Cologne 2003.
  • Vera Isabella Langer: Declamatio Romanorum: Document of legal argumentation technique, window into the society of your time and source of law? Frankfurt am Main 2007.
  • Fritz March: Personal history of pedagogy. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn 2000.
  • Christoff Neumeister , Wolfgang Raeck (Hrsg.): Speech and speaker: Assessment and representation in ancient cultures. Bibliopolis, Möhnesee 2000.
  • Chaim Perelman : Realm of Rhetoric. Beck, Munich 1980.
  • Albert Reble: History of Pedagogy. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 1951.
  • Wilfried Stroh : The power of speech. A little history of rhetoric in ancient Greece and Rome. Ullstein, Berlin 2009.
  • Gert Ueding , Bernd Steinbrink : Outline of the rhetoric. Stuttgart / Weimar 2005.
  • Christian Tornau : Rhetoric. In: Real Lexicon for Antiquity and Christianity . Volume 29, Anton Hiersemann, Stuttgart 2018 ff., Sp. 1–94.

Web links