Your complimentary articles
You’ve read all of your complimentary articles for this month. To have complete access to the thousands of philosophy articles on this site, please
If you are a subscriber please sign in to your account.
To buy or renew a subscription please visit Subscriptions.
If you are a print subscriber you can contact us to create an online account.
You can register for a free account to have four complimentary articles per month. We will occasionally email you a newsletter, from which you can unsubscribe at any time. We do not sell personal data or otherwise disclose personal information to other organisations.
Letters
Letters
Rome If You Want To • Observing Science • Jack the Possibility-Bearing Dog • Morality or Bunk? • Wagner Was A Pagan • Happiness & The Philosophers • Middle School Misogyny • Race Is Environmental • Evolve Your Progress • Deep In The Sand
Rome If You Want To
Dear Editor: Philip Vassallo’s article in Issue 172 about the Roman educationist Quintilian contains a misconception. According to Vassallo, Quintilian “lashes out” against the notion that “the orator should learn to speak persuasively to either side of an issue.” As the context (Institutio Oratora, 2:17:30) makes clear, however, what Quintilian is saying is that this notion gives rise to a great number of petty criticisms of oratory – criticisms he then proceeds to refute. Indeed, as Michael Mendelson has shown, learning to argue pro and contra lies at the heart of Quintilian’s rhetorical education. As Aristotle says, “one should be able to argue persuasively on either side of a question… in order that it may not escape our notice what the real state of the case is and that we ourselves may be able to refute if another person uses speech unjustly” (Rhetoric).
…
Advertisement
