Skip to main content
Log in

On the origin of normative argumentation theory: The paradoxical case of the Rhetoric to Alexander

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Rhetoric to Alexander (second half of the fourth century B.C.) is among the oldest contributions to the study of argumentation. From antiquity on, this treatise, which abounds in opportunistic advice, has come under heavy criticism on normative grounds. And yet, as I shall maintain here, it clearly takes into account the requirements of rational argumentation which are still in use today. Moreover, it contains the seeds of a whole series of doctrines found in modern normative argumentation theory. There are reasonable grounds for maintaining that some of these modern doctrines stem indirectly from the tradition to which the Rhetoric to Alexander belongs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Blair, J. A. and R. H. johnson: 1987, ‘Argumentation as Dialectical’, Argumentation 1, 41–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braet, A.: 1987, ‘The Classical Doctrine of Status and the Rhetorical Theory of Argumentation’, Philosophy and Rhetoric 20, 79–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchheit, V.: 1960, Untersuchungen zur Theorie des Genos Epideiktikon von Gorgias bis Aristoteles, Hueber, München.

  • Cole, Th.: 1991, The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece, Johns Hopkins UP, Baltimore and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cope, E. M.: 1867, An Introduction to Aristotle's Rhetoric, with Analysis Notes and Appendices, Mac Millan, London, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eemeren, F. H. van and T. Kruiger: 1987, ‘Identifying Argumentation Schemes’, in F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Perspectives and Approaches, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 70–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forster, E. S.: 9, ‘The Rhetorica ad Alexandrum’, in W. D. Ross (ed.), The Works of Aristotle, Vol. XI, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortenbaugh, W. W.: 1992, ‘Review of Cole (1991)’, Gnomon 65, 385–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuhrmann, M.: 1964, ‘Untersuchungen zur Textgeschichte der Pseudo-aristotelischen Alexander-Rhetorik (der Techne des Anaximenes von Lampsakos)’, Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur Mainz. Abhandlungen der Geistes- un Sozia lwissenschaften Klasse 1964, nr. 7, 545–747.

  • Fuhrmann, M. (Hg.): 1966, Anaximenes, Ars Rhetorica, Teubner, Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuhrmann, M.: 1984, Die Antike Rhetorik. Eine Einführung, Artemis, München und Zürich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, G.: 1963, The Art of Persuasion in Greece, Princeton University Press, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, G.: 1980, Classical Rhetoric and Its Christian and Secular Tradition from Ancient to Modern Times, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, G. A.: u1991, Aristotle On Rhetoric, A theory of Civic Discourse, Oxford University Press, New York and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kienpointner, M.: 1992, Alltagslogik, Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirhady, D. C.: 1994, ‘Aristotle, the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum and the tria genera causarum’, in W. W. Fortenbaugh and D. C. Mirhady (eds.), Peripatetic Rhetoric after Aristotle, Transaction Publisher, New Brunswick and London, pp. 54–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadeau, R.: 1958, ‘Hermogenes on ‘Stock Issues’ in Deliberative Speaking’, Speech Monographs 25, 59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perelman, Ch. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca: 1958, La nouvelle rhétorique: traité de l'argumentation, l'Université de Bruxelles, Bruxelles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rackham, H. (ed. and transl.): 1937, 1983, Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, Harvard University Press and Heinemann, Cambridge (Mass.) and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schellens, P. J.: 1987, ‘Types of Argument and the Critical Reader’, in F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, Ch. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Analysis and Practices, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 34–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schenkeveld, D. M.: 1992, ‘Review of Cole (1991)’, Mnemosyne 45, 387–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, St. E.: 1958, The Uses of Argument, Cambridge UP, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Braet, A.C. On the origin of normative argumentation theory: The paradoxical case of the Rhetoric to Alexander . Argumentation 10, 347–359 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182200

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00182200

KEY WORDS

Navigation