The RiDdLe: rhetoric, dialectic and logic forms two traditions in the trivium of the liberal arts. Combined with grammar, these arts form an arsenal for the way words are used in language and discourse. These arts pertain to the mind. We must be on guard in order to discover the answers to this RiDdLe. If grammar is defined as the art of writing correctly and logic the art of thinking correctly, rhetoric can be used as discovery or defense against flawed grammar, logic or dialectic. It is a way to think, speak, and write persuasively. The concepts of grammar, rhetoric, dialectic and logic can be used to manipulate language and make even lies appear true. Much depends on the definitions used to define such arts. I hope to shed light on a few. Whether to defend truth or promote lies, this RiDdLe rages in the minds of men.
Aristotle wrote, “Rhetoric is the counterpart of dialectic.” The art of rhetoric depends on and uses logic and dialectic in its influence. It is not tied to a single definite class of subjects; it is as universal as dialectic. Rhetoric and dialectic deal with probability, not certainty. They alone are capable of generating arguments. Sister Miriam Joseph said “The five traditional components of rhetoric were invention (finding arguments for persuasion), arrangement of the parts of a composition, style, memory of speech, and the proper use of voice and gesture in delivering it.” The goal of rhetoric should be to support reason, not oppress it. At its core rhetoric is a means to persuade the minds of men into apathy or action by speech or letter. Rhetoric is the art of observation concerned with thought, with reasoning and with argument. We must be continually transformed by the renewing of our minds.
To those on guard, dialectic is an art for determining meaning. As the counterpart of rhetoric, it is the art that deals with inferences, definitions, and divisions. It is a method of inquiry. The Romans used dialectic and logic as interchangeable names for the same discipline. Dialectic originated with the Greek Sophists. Compared to the Romans who saw the dialectic as a means to truth, the Sophist did not aim at truth. Sophistry misuses the art of dialectic with intent. Some may say their dialectic took a less logical approach. Dialectic already has an intention for argument and criticism. The sophist created a twisted dialectic and scientific study to produce the dark side of knowledge; opinion or reasoning based on half-truths, assumptions and lies.
Gibbon writes, “The human faculties are fortified by the art and practice of dialectics. It is the keenest weapon of dispute… more effectual for the detection of error than for the investigation of truth.” The art of dialectic can be used in discourse for defense or to find truth in the convictions of men, it can be used to shine light on the errors caused by lack of definition in discourse or rigor in reasoning. As Augustine observes, “In the use of it, we must guard against the love of wrangling, and the childish vanity of entrapping an adversary… for there are many of what are called sophisms, inferences in reasoning that are false, and yet so close imitation of the true, as to deceive not only dull people, but cleaver men too, when they are not on their guard.”
In defending the mind, logically we must first value truth. Logic and the principles of logic, from a certain perspective, come before the rules of rhetoric or dialectic. Truth should be upheld so lies cannot infiltrate. Logic is the name for the discipline that studies the principles of correct reasoning, the art of correct thought. Aristotle divided logic into three parts according to its subject matter–scientific demonstration or the posterior analytics based on that of truth; the dialectic based on the subject matter of opinion, or that which is merely probable; and the sophistic, its subject matter ground in that generally accepted and appropriate which truly is not. The sophist seeks the appearance of truth in order to win an argument. He ignores the fine pursuit of truth to be gained by forms of argument worthy of the name, scientific demonstration and dialectic. Logic serves the guard in turning language into a powerful force. It is a discipline born for the formulation of methods of debate, and the discovery of fallacy, for the construction of argument, and for the theory of classification and definition. Logic is an art, which seems to encompass both rhetoric and dialectic, from the point of understanding the terms and questions that arise from communication and conflict. Logic is an influential weapon used in the search for truth and its defense.
Be forewarned. Rhetoric allows for the persuasion of dialectical descent. All logic is dialectic. All dialectic is twisted. Therefore all logic is twisted. A logical reasoning where a conclusion is reached from two statements is a syllogism. The conclusion is not always truth. Aristotle said, “The distinction between truth and probability, or between knowledge and opinion, does not affect the formal character of either the induction or syllogism.” The conclusion may be scientific or dialectical, demonstratively certain or merely possible. Rhetorical skill must consist in the ability to reason logically, to understand human character and goodness in their forms, and to understand emotions… to know the cause and the way to excite the mind. Rhetoric is used for setting forth meaning once it is established. These skills offer the rhetorician the ability to persuade the mind to the betterment of truth and the dialectician to persuade to the opinion of the day. The art of rhetoric involves more than training in grammar, logic or dialectic. It involves the careful study of ethics and psychology, and peace in the art of war.
Dialectic is intended to resolve differences between two views rather than to establish one of then as true. Dialectic is searching for the division. Dialectic is the beginning or end of some sort of intellectual conflict; it develops and then attempts to resolve such conflict. A particularly nasty type of dialectic involves creating a problem to produce the solution. Think terrorist-patriot. However, dialectic seems to have an Achilles heel, for when in conflict in the realm of debate, while one party attacks the weaker side of his opponent he opens his own weaknesses. This is true in the art of war as well. If used in defense its power is logical. However, if the system of dialectic is useless for the discovery of the truth, it rather assists in confirming and rendering as true, the errors founded on crude notions. It becomes more hurtful than useful. It is after all, confrontational in its intention. This sophisticated dialectic does nothing to liberate the mind or to seek after truth. The conclusions of dialectic are only probable. They are based on assumptions rather than truth. The dialectical debate can become a round table of unending discussion for the dialectician. Its end is not always in truth but in eternal conflict. This RiDdLe we hope to resolve with logic.
Logic gains us the distinction between knowledge and opinion, truth and falsehood. “The identification of dialectic with logic implies its distinction from rhetoric and certainly from sophistry.” Using rhetoric and dialectic correctly, logic becomes a powerful weapon in our defense. Logic and dialectic could then be said to have a conflicting course. If logic is the great assistant to the discovery of meaning and truth; then dialectic divides in anticipation of conquer. They could be thought of as opposing forces. Logic and dialectic share some of the same concepts, however. They both seek to answer tough questions, some next to impossible to answer. They both use the mind to express ideas. They both are faculties for providing arguments. We hope to find a truthful answer at the end of a logical question. For dialectic, the illusion of truth can sometimes end the conflict, persuading the minds of men to follow a course not based in truth. Dialectic could then fittingly be called a show of logic. There are many types of logic. At its heart, logic is a tool for sharpening thought. Rhetoric is essential but it is first logic then grammar that allow this RiDdLe to transform into a true trivium of the liberal arts.
Men should revere the wisdom of these arts. The minds of men are not impervious to corruption and enslavement. For the day has arrived that man’s mind is twisted, to think dependence freedom and murder respectable.
Ephesians 6:12 “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of this “Great RiDdLe,” that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of dialectic; and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; Above all, taking the shield of rhetoric, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of logic, and the words of the Spirit, which are the words of God: Go forth; train your mind in these timeless arts.