This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
‘Examples are most appropriate to public speaking, enthymemes more so to forensic’. Pleading gives more occasion to the employment of logical reasoning; it admits of closer and subtler argumentation; for the reasons stated in III 12. 5. Comp. I 9. 40, where the facts are the same, but the reason assigned for the latter different. ‘For the one’, (understand δημηγορία, from δημηγορικώτατα. Victorius understands συμβουλή, and Vater πίστις,) ‘dealing as it does with the future, is forced consequently to derive examples from past events (from which the analogous events future are inferred), whilst the other’ (understand in like manner δίκη from δικανικώτερα; not πίστις as Vater) ‘deals with matters of fact, true or false, which admit to a greater extent (than deliberative speaking) of demonstrative reason and necessary conclusions (not to the full extent, which is found only in science): for past facts involve a kind of necessity’. Past events are beyond recall, fixed and definite, and thus have a sort of necessary character about them; and they can be argued about, and their relations deduced, with some approach to certainty: about things future no exact calculation is possible, anticipation and inference from the past is all that nature allows: uncertainty is the characteristic of the future.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.