Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Cicero on Pain and Happiness

Cicero on Pain and Happiness

Ratings: (0)|Views: 60|Likes:
Published by Florencia Cp

More info:

Published by: Florencia Cp on Aug 08, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/17/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Cicero on Pain and HappinessCicero, Tusculan Disputations II & V, with a Summary of III & IV by A. E. DouglasReview by: J. G. F. Powell
The Classical Review,
New Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (1991), pp. 67-68Published by:
on behalf of
Stable URL:
Accessed: 04/04/2012 11:05
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
.
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jspJSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Cambridge University Press
and
The Classical Association
are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to
The Classical Review.
http://www.jstor.org
 
677
HE CLASSICAL REVIEWHE CLASSICAL REVIEW
mechanicaltranscriberof Greekbooks.IndeedsomerecentscholarshiparguesthatCiceromadehisown substantivecontributionstophilosophy.Itseemssignificantthatthe mostvaluablepartsof the commentariesare on suchmattersas theanticipationsinDe Inventioneof Cicero'slaterideas,on DeRe PublicaingeneralandespeciallyonIsocrateanparallels,and onthefragmentaryConsolatioandHortensius,while on thesubstantialandphilosophicallyimportantAcademicaandDe Finibushe hashardlyanythingtosay.It ismostunfortunatethat thewhole bookisdominatedbya'majorthesis'(p.13)whichisquite implausible,that allCicero'sworks consideredarein aspecificandlimited sense'rhetorical'.Clearly, philosophicaldiscourse,likeanyother thatseekstopersuade,has itsrhetoric. Itmayoccasionallyuse sometechniquesof traditionalrhetoric.ButM.attemptstoapplytohissubjectsomecategoriesofforensicRhetoric,and thatquite rigidly,despitethequalificationthat the modelfits'at least some ofthetime'(p.25),anddespitethe factthat Cicero'sforensicoratorycandepartfrom thetext-book. Theattemptfails,as isshown at theveryoutsetbythequestion-marksinthe formalanalysisof DeInventione,andlater,to takeoneespeciallybizarreexample,bytheanalysisofBrutus intosix(!)narrationeswithdigressions(whichareactuallypartoftheargument,notdigressionastaught byrhetoricians).'Proems' canusuallybe found-a book mustbegin,and sometimes-a book mustend-aperoration,thoughrarelyof the forensicemotion-stirring type.Butforthe middlesections,narration,argumentandcounter-argument,onlytheeyeoffaith can see thespecificallyforensic structureswhich M.proposes.Thetheoryowes itsoriginstoasuggestionof E.K.Rand toM.asaHarvard undergraduatein 1932 that the FirstTusculanmightlenditselfto rhetoricalanalysis.Soindeeditmight,sinceexplicitly(1.7,2.26)Cicerodescribes the Tusculans as'declamations'.But forensicoratoryis still irrelevant. Forexample,thearrayofanecdoteswith which Tusculans1,2and5all endpresumablyreflects the Greektraditionfor thiskind ofnon-forensic discourse.Inother worksCicero borrowedotherphilosophical styles.Allofferedscopeforhisrhetoricalskills. But inDe Divinatione2.1X- Ciceroarguesthat eventhematureRhetorica are philosophicalinthetraditionof Aristotle andTheophrastus:hewouldhave beensurprised byM.'suse ofthispassage (p.14)tojustifytreatingallthephilosophicaas forensic rhetoricinpractice.Finally,theAppendixon'CiceroinAmerica',while notliterallywhat the titlesuggests, beingoften concerned ratherwithresemblances between Cicero and somefineandgenerousmanifestations of the Americanspirit,reveals,as does the restofthebook,the urbanitas and humanitaswhich,alongperhapswithover-indulgenceofcertainpredilections,M. shareswith theauthor headmires.UniversityofBirminghamA
LA
N D
OUG LAS CICERO ONPAIN ANDHAPPINESSA. E.DOUGLAS(ed.,tr.):Cicero,TusculanDisputationsII&V,with aSummary ofIII&IV.Edited with anIntroduction,TranslationandCommentary. Pp.viii+168. Warminster: Aris&Phillips,1990.?21.50(Paper, ?8.25)
StudentsofCiceronianphilosophywillwelcomeProfessorDouglas'slatestcontribution to therapidly expandingAris&Phillipsseries.Comparisonwithhis
0009-840X/91$3.00?OxfordUniversityPress1991
mechanicaltranscriberof Greekbooks.IndeedsomerecentscholarshiparguesthatCiceromadehisown substantivecontributionstophilosophy.Itseemssignificantthatthe mostvaluablepartsof the commentariesare on suchmattersas theanticipationsinDe Inventioneof Cicero'slaterideas,on DeRe PublicaingeneralandespeciallyonIsocrateanparallels,and onthefragmentaryConsolatioandHortensius,while on thesubstantialandphilosophicallyimportantAcademicaandDe Finibushe hashardlyanythingtosay.It ismostunfortunatethat thewhole bookisdominatedbya'majorthesis'(p.13)whichisquite implausible,that allCicero'sworks consideredarein aspecificandlimited sense'rhetorical'.Clearly, philosophicaldiscourse,likeanyother thatseekstopersuade,has itsrhetoric. Itmayoccasionallyuse sometechniquesof traditionalrhetoric.ButM.attemptstoapplytohissubjectsomecategoriesofforensicRhetoric,and thatquite rigidly,despitethequalificationthat the modelfits'at least some ofthetime'(p.25),anddespitethe factthat Cicero'sforensicoratorycandepartfrom thetext-book. Theattemptfails,as isshown at theveryoutsetbythequestion-marksinthe formalanalysisof DeInventione,andlater,to takeoneespeciallybizarreexample,bytheanalysisofBrutus intosix(!)narrationeswithdigressions(whichareactuallypartoftheargument,notdigressionastaught byrhetoricians).'Proems' canusuallybe found-a book mustbegin,and sometimes-a book mustend-aperoration,thoughrarelyof the forensicemotion-stirring type.Butforthe middlesections,narration,argumentandcounter-argument,onlytheeyeoffaith can see thespecificallyforensic structureswhich M.proposes.Thetheoryowes itsoriginstoasuggestionof E.K.Rand toM.asaHarvard undergraduatein 1932 that the FirstTusculanmightlenditselfto rhetoricalanalysis.Soindeeditmight,sinceexplicitly(1.7,2.26)Cicerodescribes the Tusculans as'declamations'.But forensicoratoryis still irrelevant. Forexample,thearrayofanecdoteswith which Tusculans1,2and5all endpresumablyreflects the Greektraditionfor thiskind ofnon-forensic discourse.Inother worksCicero borrowedotherphilosophical styles.Allofferedscopeforhisrhetoricalskills. But inDe Divinatione2.1X- Ciceroarguesthat eventhematureRhetorica are philosophicalinthetraditionof Aristotle andTheophrastus:hewouldhave beensurprised byM.'suse ofthispassage (p.14)tojustifytreatingallthephilosophicaas forensic rhetoricinpractice.Finally,theAppendixon'CiceroinAmerica',while notliterallywhat the titlesuggests, beingoften concerned ratherwithresemblances between Cicero and somefineandgenerousmanifestations of the Americanspirit,reveals,as does the restofthebook,the urbanitas and humanitaswhich,alongperhapswithover-indulgenceofcertainpredilections,M. shareswith theauthor headmires.UniversityofBirminghamA
LA
N D
OUG LAS CICERO ONPAIN ANDHAPPINESSA. E.DOUGLAS(ed.,tr.):Cicero,TusculanDisputationsII&V,with aSummary ofIII&IV.Edited with anIntroduction,TranslationandCommentary. Pp.viii+168. Warminster: Aris&Phillips,1990.?21.50(Paper, ?8.25)
StudentsofCiceronianphilosophywillwelcomeProfessorDouglas'slatestcontribution to therapidly expandingAris&Phillipsseries.Comparisonwithhis
0009-840X/91$3.00?OxfordUniversityPress1991

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->