Abstract
In chapter one of the twelfth book of his Institutio oratoria, Quintilian goes out of his way to defend his meta-rhetorical thesis that only a morally good man can be called an orator. This article argues that, from a logical point of view, his reasoning has many leaks and is ultimately not convincing. What is more, Quintilian seems to have been conscious about the fallaciousness of his own argument. So this article goes on to search for an explanation of his resolution to take upon himself the herculean task to establish the validity of his paradoxical thesis.
- Journal
- Rhetorica
- Published
- 2018-04-01
- DOI
- 10.1353/rht.2018.0000
- CompPile
- Open Access
- Closed
- Topics
-
- Export
- BibTeX RIS
Citation context
Cited by in this index (0)
No articles in this index cite this work.
References (0)
No references on file for this article.
Related articles
-
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication Mar 2026Miriam F. Williams
-
Rhetorica Sep 2025Brent Nelson
-
Rhetorica Jun 2024Christoph Schwameis
-
Rhetoric & Public Affairs Mar 2024Jaclyn Bruner
-
Rhetorica Jan 2024Mind the Audience: Forensic Rhetoric, Persuasion, and Identification by Reference to the Social Identity of Athenian dikastai ↗Vasileios Adamidis