[13]
There
is all the less reason, since I have already shown in
the first book1 that philosophers only usurped this
department of knowledge after it had been abandoned by the orators: it was always the peculiar
property of rhetoric and the philosophers are really
trespassers. Finally, since the discussion of whatever is brought before it is the task of dialectic,
which is really a concise form of oratory, why should
not this task be regarded as also being the appropriate material for continuous oratory?
[p. 363]
There is a further objection made by certain
critics, who say “Well then, ”
1 Pref. § 10 sqq.
Quintilian. With an English Translation. Harold Edgeworth Butler. Cambridge. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann, Ltd. 1920.
The Annenberg CPB/Project provided support for entering this text.
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.