Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Aristotle defines rhetoric as the ability in a particular case to see the available means of persuasion. He defines pisteis (plural of πῐ́στῐς, pístis, lit. ' 'trust in others, faith; means of persuasion' ') as atechnic (inartistic) and entechnic (artistic). Of the pisteis provided through speech there are three: ethos, pathos, and logos.
Aristotle's definition of rhetoric, "the faculty of observing, in any given case, the available means of persuasion", presupposes a distinction between an art (τέχνη, techne) of speech–making and a cognitively prior faculty of discovery. That is so because, before one argues a case, one must discover what is at issue.
Aristotle defined rhetoric as "the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion", and since mastery of the art was necessary for victory in a case at law, for passage of proposals in the assembly, or for fame as a speaker in civic ceremonies, he called it "a combination of the science of logic and of the ethical ...
Aristotle's immanent realism means his epistemology is based on the study of things that exist or happen in the world, and rises to knowledge of the universal, whereas for Plato epistemology begins with knowledge of universal Forms (or ideas) and descends to knowledge of particular imitations of these. [52]
Aristotelianism (/ ˌ ær ɪ s t ə ˈ t iː l i ə n ɪ z əm / ARR-i-stə-TEE-lee-ə-niz-əm) is a philosophical tradition inspired by the work of Aristotle, usually characterized by deductive logic and an analytic inductive method in the study of natural philosophy and metaphysics.
Sachs (2005), amongst other authors (such as Aryeh Kosman and Ursula Coope), proposes that the solution to problems interpreting Aristotle's definition must be found in the distinction Aristotle makes between two different types of potentiality, with only one of those corresponding to the "potentiality as such" appearing in the definition of ...
In the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle says explicitly that one must begin with what is familiar to us, and "the that" or "the fact that" (NE I.1095b2-13). Ancient commentators agree that what Aristotle means here is that his treatise must rely upon practical, everyday knowledge of virtuous actions as the starting points of his inquiry, and that ...
Aristotle applies his theory of hylomorphism to living things. He defines a soul as that which makes a living thing alive. [19] Life is a property of living things, just as knowledge and health are. [20] Therefore, a soul is a form—that is, a specifying principle or cause—of a living thing. [21]