엔튀메마는 왜 수사학적 입증의 몸통인가? -아리스토텔레스의 『수사학』을 중심으로-

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine how enthumema dealt with in Aristotle's Rhetoric can be understood in various contexts. Aristotle argued that the only technical element in rhetorical persuasion is proof (pistis), and that enthymema is the body of proof. And enthumema is defined as rhetorical deduction (sullogismos rhētorikos), making rhetoric a logical technique corresponding to dialectics. However, what enthymema is as a rhetorical deduction can be interpreted in various ways even within the Rhetoric, and it is still a subject of controversy among scholars to this day. In particular, many problems are raised when comparing Aristotle's enthumema with the usage of enthymema by various orators and rhetoricians in ancient Athens. Deduction (sullogismos) is defined as a discourse in which, certain things being stated, something other than what is stated follows from their being so. The question is how entumema, a rhetorical deduction, can be understood and utilized from this definition. This paper examines the various interpretations of entumema that have been presented so far and attempts to answer the following questions. Is enthumema an elliptical syllogism? Is enthumema a deduction that starts from probable premises and draws a probable conclusion? Is enthumema a piecemeal proof of the scale of a syllogism? Is enthumema the dominant point of the entire speech? In the process of answering these questions, various aspects of enthumema will be reexamined, and the possibility of a new understanding that can encompass the various aspects as a whole will be opened. In the process of answering these questions, various aspects of entumema will be reexamined and the possibility of a new understanding that can comprehensively encompass the various aspects of entumema will be opened.