Rhetoric, the Emotions, and Political Morality: Cicero’s Superiority over Aristotle
51 Pages Posted: 13 Jul 2012 Last revised: 25 Jul 2012
Date Written: 2012
Notwithstanding the widespread assumption that Aristotle forges a better relationship among rhetoric, the emotions, and political morality than Cicero, I contend that Cicero, not Aristotle, offers a more relevant account of the relationship among these terms. Closer analysis of Aristotle, I argue, shows that his account of the emotions in rhetoric is neither morally grounded nor evades the moral problems originating in emotional manipulation. Grounding emotion in cognition does not indicate that the belief, on which the emotion is based, is true. Rational but false arguments can also be used to induce emotions in an audience. Moreover, Aristotle’s approach to emotional appeals in politics is, compared to Cicero’s, static, unable to adapt to new political circumstances. I suggest that Cicero’s approach to the rhetorical emotions, if given a fair hearing, will be more acceptable to a modern audience than Aristotle’s because it is ethically based while also responsive to political realities. Cicero accommodates emotional appeals to circumstance based on his belief in decorum as a moral principle. The flexibility of the Ciceronian path allows it to be adapted to our present political state of affairs, as opposed to the Aristotelian approach, which cannot. Further, I show that emotional manipulation in Cicero is not as problematical as it initially appears.
Keywords: Cicero, Aristotle, rhetoric, morality, emotions, politics
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation