Perelman

==Perleman, Chaïm . //The Realm of Rhetoric // ==

(1982)
Perelman says of his predecessors: No single truth—Sophists. There is a Truth and philosopher must seek—Plato. Distrust rhetoric and other cookery—Plato’s Socrates. More nuanced—separation of practical from theoretical—Aristotle. All are good. But Ramus and Descartes are BAD.
 * Aristotelian/Ciceronian – to equate principles of practical argument with principles and processes of formal logic and mathematics is mistaken (as Aristotle asserted) but still abandons traditional distinctions between rhetoric and dialectic, finding Aristotle’s attempt to maintain the distinction irregular and unnecessary. Notes that Aristotle studied dialectical reasoning – that dialectical reasoning presupposes premises which are constituted by generally accepted opinion.
 * **Adherence, audience at particular time or place and particular group (kairos), ambiguity of language, “practical reason” **
 * Came to rhetoric as a result of search for “a logic of value judgments” legal philosophy
 * Extant (surviving) systems of philosophy he found were devoted to formal logic as the foundation of rationality, which relegated any discussion of values to the realm of irrational and subjective. Yet, judgments about justice, morality, politics, and religion are of supreme importance in human affairs. Must not be relegated to irrational.
 * Justice is answered by argument, yet argument has no standing in philosophy. Concludes “logical value judgments do not exist”
 * Studied actual arguments made by judges, philosophers, politicians, and others seeking to make value decisions
 * Realized the arguments they made were strikingly similar to classical topics—moreover, Aristotle’s description of the connection between dialectic and rhetoric spoke to his concerns
 * So, set out to “revive “ rhetoric and re-link with philosophy
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Dispenses with formal logic as unusable in most matters—need dialectic instead.
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Follows Aristotle’s distinction between analytical philosophy on one hand and dialectic and rhet on the other.
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Blames Ramus and Decartes for problems due to moving dialectic to the realm of logic and reducing rhetoric to verbal ornamentation. Ramus was “fatal for rhetoric” – tossed aside the Aristotelian distinction between analytical and dialectical judgments
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Says Ramus created the problem to find truth of logic in value or behavior and Descartes exacerbated the problem by declaring the “merely plausible” to be effectively false. Perelman disagrees with both absolute skepticism and absolute truth.
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">**<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Argument cannot follow logic (formal) back to Aristotelian dialectic. But more pragmatic than Aristotle. Rhetoric is not theoretical, but applicable, not a method of exploring human nature, but a tool. This is New Rhetoric, which collapses under postmodernism. **
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Formal argument-demonstrations of a proposition. Non-formal argument- concerned with **<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">adherence ** of audience.
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">**<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Realm of Rhetoric 1982 is entire universe of argumentative discourse ** Seeks to identify HOW arguers claim //<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">rationality – //what does reasonable mean
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">In both dialectic and rhetoric as traditionally defined **<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">“it is in terms of an audience that argumentation develops” – arguer always seeking adherence of some //<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">other // persons to an undemonstratable thesis **
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Argumentation proceeds informally, not according to rules of formal deduction and induction
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">**<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Arguments are ALWAYS addressed to audiences (even self) for purposes of adherence to theses presented (specific audience or “universal” audience, which is hardest to do. When you choose universal audience, you argue philosophically) **
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">To be successful arguments must proceed from premises that are acceptable to the audiences
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Argument always includes procedures by which ideas and values can be give special presence (French meaning – made present) in the minds of those addressed
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Ambiguity is never avoidable in arguments because language in unavoidable equivocal in some degree – more than one interpretation
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Liaisons or relationships of concepts and attitudes are created by verbal techniques:
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Quasi-logical arguments that claim to be rational because they resemble patterns of formal reasoning
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Arguments based on claims concerning structure of reality
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Arguments based on examples, illustrations, models
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Clarifications of one idea by associating it with another, as in analogy or metaphor
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Process by which some part of an idea is detached from it so that the primary idea can be seen as objectionable or incompatible with features
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Amplification or abridgment of ideas or values
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; background-color: transparent; color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: serif; font-family: serif; font-size: 16px; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; vertical-align: baseline;">Imposing special orders on ideas or arguments
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">**<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">All argumentation is rhetorical rather than “logical” or “valid” – claims must be made to seem reasonable, cannot be proved completely, must be judged to be reasonable **
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">**<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Cannot expect audience adherence to be total or irrevocable – can only seek a degree of acceptance/adherence **
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">**<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-size: 16px; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Place ideas in “contact” – not locked together – can’t “entail” in an argument, and only create liaisons. **