University of Tabriz Journal of Philosophical Investigations 2251-7960 17 44 2023 11 22 Rhetoric and Its Relationship with Politics in Aristotle's Thought Rhetoric and Its Relationship with Politics in Aristotle's Thought 222 241 15758 10.22034/jpiut.2022.52677.3326 FA Fatemeh Raygani Ph.D. Candidate of Philosophy, Imam Khomeini International University, Iran Ali F Ath Taheri Associate Professor of Philosophy Department, Imam Khomeini International University, Iran Alinaqi Baghershahi Associate Professor of Philosophy Department, Imam Khomeini International University, Iran Meysam Sefidkhosh Assistant Professor of Philosophy Department, Shahid Beheshti University, Iran Journal Article 2022 07 23 Rhetoric, being among five arts of logic (i.e., Sana’at Khams), is a persuasive yet uncertain art. However, philosophers consider it as a non-philosophical and invalid art. In such a view, this art has no philosophical value and its users seek to deceive and influence the audience in order to attract their attention, so logical speech must be de-rhetorical. The study of early philosophers, especially Aristotle, shows that rhetoric is not one of the branches of uncertain logic, but it is a political tool and is a complementary art in practical philosophy, and because practical philosophy is one of the branches of philosophy, it is also related to philosophy. Plato considered rhetoric to be against the politics of society. Aristotle, ‌also under the influence of Plato, first criticized the common discourse of his time, which relied on the Forensic type and sophistic method. Then, he tries to teach a desirable version of rhetoric for the prosperity of society, considering the necessity of rhetoric in political societies. Aristotle uses enthymeme to relate rhetoric to premises and to highlight its political nature by emphasizing the deliberative rhetoric. This study aims to investigate this proposition in Aristotle’s thoughts, and clarify the political implications of rhetoric. Rhetoric, being among five arts of logic (i.e., Sana’at Khams), is a persuasive yet uncertain art. However, philosophers consider it as a non-philosophical and invalid art. In such a view, this art has no philosophical value and its users seek to deceive and influence the audience in order to attract their attention, so logical speech must be de-rhetorical. The study of early philosophers, especially Aristotle, shows that rhetoric is not one of the branches of uncertain logic, but it is a political tool and is a complementary art in practical philosophy, and because practical philosophy is one of the branches of philosophy, it is also related to philosophy. Plato considered rhetoric to be against the politics of society. Aristotle, ‌also under the influence of Plato, first criticized the common discourse of his time, which relied on the Forensic type and sophistic method. Then, he tries to teach a desirable version of rhetoric for the prosperity of society, considering the necessity of rhetoric in political societies. Aristotle uses enthymeme to relate rhetoric to premises and to highlight its political nature by emphasizing the deliberative rhetoric. This study aims to investigate this proposition in Aristotle’s thoughts, and clarify the political implications of rhetoric. https://philosophy.tabrizu.ac.ir/article_15758_3012c4cc526d0b50658e203f8e5b2a79.pdf