RE: ONT 18 Jul 2002 -C- Reflective Logic
Please excuse me if this is a minority or even a singleton position, but
does anybody else on this list read this spam?
Tim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-ontology@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Jon Awbrey
> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 8:00 AM
> To: Ontology; Peirce List; SemioCom
> Subject: ONT 18 Jul 2002 -C- Reflective Logic
>
>
>
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
>
> Note 9
>
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
>
> | Each of the three kinds has a different special end ['telos'], and
> | as there are three kinds of Rhetoric, so there are three special ends.
> | The end of the deliberative speaker is the expedient or harmful; for he
> | who exhorts recommends a course of action as better, and he who
> dissuades
> | advises against it as worse; all other considerations, such as
> justice and
> | injustice, honour and disgrace, are included as accessory in
> reference to this.
> | The end of the forensic speaker is the just or the unjust; in
> this case also all
> | other considerations are included as accessory. The end of
> those who praise or blame
> | is the honourable and disgraceful; and they also refer all
> other considerations to
> | these. A sign that what I have stated is the end which each
> has in view is the fact
> | that sometimes the speakers will not dispute about the other
> points. For example, a
> | man on trial does not always deny that an act has been
> committed or damage inflicted
> | by him, but he will never admit that the act is unjust; for
> otherwise a trial would
> | be unnecessary. Similarly, the deliberative orator, although
> he often sacrifices
> | everything else, will never admit that he is recommending what
> is inexpedient or
> | is dissuading from what is useful; but often he is quite
> indifferent about showing
> | that the enslavement of neigbouring peoples, even if they have
> done no harm, is not
> | an act of injustice. Similarly, those who praise or blame do
> not consider whether
> | a man has done what is expedient or harmful, but frequently
> make it a matter for
> | praise that, disregarding his own interest, he performed some
> deed of honour.
> | For example, they praise Achilles because he went to the aid of
> his comrade
> | Patroclus, knowing that he was fated to die, although he might
> have lived.
> | To him such a death was more honourable, although life was more
> expedient.
> |
> | Aristotle, "Art of Rhetoric", 1.3.5-6
> |
> | Aristotle, "The 'Art' of Rhetoric",
> | John Henry Freese (trans.), in:
> |'Aristotle, Volume 22', G.P. Goold (ed.),
> | William Heinemann, London, UK, 1926, 1982.
>
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o