|
Forensic rhetoric, as coined in Aristotle's ''On Rhetoric'', encompasses any discussion of past action including legal discourse—the primary setting for the emergence of rhetoric as a discipline and theory. This contrasts with deliberative rhetoric and epideictic rhetoric, which are reserved for discussions concerning future and present actions respectively.〔Aristotle, On Rhetoric, 1.3.10-15.〕 In contemporary times, the word ''forensic'' is commonly associated with criminal and civil law referring specifically to forensic science. It is important to note that the term ''forensic'' associated with criminal investigation exists because forensic (or judicial) rhetoric first existed.〔George Kennedy, Aristotle On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 87-118.〕 ==References in ''On Rhetoric''== An introduction of the three types of rhetoric (forensic, deliberative, and epideictic) occurs in Book I Chapter III of Aristotle's ''On Rhetoric''.〔Kennedy 1991, 87.〕 Discussion of forensic rhetoric is found in Book I Chapters X-XV, outlined as follows: * Chapter 10: "Topics about Wrongdoing" asserts: "Let wrongdoing be defined as doing harm willingly in contravention of the law."〔Aristotle, 1.3.10.〕 Aristotle also defines three considerations of forensic rhetoric: 1. For what purposes persons do wrong 2. How these persons are mentally disposed 3. What kind of persons they wrong and what these persons are like. * Chapter 11: "Topics about Pleasure" categorizes pleasure as natural, not compulsive, and can be the cause of crime: gaining revenge, winning, or restoring honor. * Chapter 12: "Topics about Wrongdoers and Those Wronged" includes many features of both the wrongdoers and the wronged that relate to criminalities: * *Wrongdoers: believe they will not be detected or punished, are likely to go unsuspected if their appearance is inconsistent with the charges (a weak man charged with assault), have either no enemy or many enemies. * *Those who are wronged: have something the wrongdoer lacks, do not live cautiously, have never been wronged, or have been often wronged with no retaliation. * Chapter 13: "Topics about Justice and Injustice" discusses the law in two ways: specific (that which has been defined for each person) and common (that which is based on nature or common principle). * Chapter 14: "The Koinon of Degree of Magnitude" proposes: "A wrong is greater insofar as it is caused by greater injustice. Thus the least wrong can sometimes be the greatest."〔Aristotle, ''On Rhetoric'', 1.3.14.〕 Aristotle asserts that varying degrees of wrong exist based on the accessibility of retribution from the wronged and punishment for the wrongdoer. * Chapter 15: "Atechnic Pisteis in Judicial Rhetoric: Laws, Witnesses, Contracts, Tortures, Oaths" summarizes the objects listed in its title, including evidence that supports or refutes a case. These summaries and guidelines are very practical in law both in Aristotle's and in modern times. Aristotle also focuses on fairness and introduces the possibility that the defendant could be legally guilty yet morally justified.〔Kennedy 1991, 87-118.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Forensic rhetoric」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|