Aristotle on the Disciplines of Argument: Rhetoric, Dialectic, Analytic
Abstract
According to an argument made by other authors, analytic —the formal logical theory of the categorical syllogism expounded in the Prior Analytics—is a relatively late development in Aristotle’s thinking about argument. As a general theory of validity, it served as the master discipline of argument in Aristotle’s mature thought about the subject. The object of this paper is to explore his early conception of the relations between the argumentative disciplines. Its principal thesis, based chiefly on evidence about the relation between dialectic and rhetoric, is that before the advent of analytic dialectic played a double role. It was both the art or discipline of one practice of argumentation and the master discipline of argument to which other disciplines turned for their understanding of the fundamentals of argument.
- Journal
- Rhetorica
- Published
- 2007-01-01
- DOI
- 10.1353/rht.2007.0027
- CompPile
- Search in CompPile ↗
- Open Access
- Closed
- Topics
- Export
- BibTeX RIS
Citation Context
Cited by in this index (0)
No articles in this index cite this work.
Cites in this index (0)
No references match articles in this index.
Related Articles
-
Res Rhetorica Apr 2026Arkadiusz Sokolnicki
-
Poroi Feb 2026Using Stasis Theory as a Heuristic for Examining Epistemological Dilemmas in a Post-Truth Landscape ↗Bruce Bowles
-
Res Rhetorica Jan 2026Ethos – between <i>vir bonus</i> and VIA: Virtue ethics in contemporary rhetorical education ↗Agnieszka Budzyńska-Daca
-
Rhetorica Jan 2026The Daimonion of Isocrates: Anti-Socratic Polemics and the Power of Politikoi Logoi in the Philippos ↗Tobias Hirsch
-
Philosophy & Rhetoric Oct 2025The Intellectual and Cultural Origins of Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca’s New Rhetoric Project: Commentaries on and Translations of Seven Foundational Articles, 1933–1958 ↗Christopher W. Tindale