Differences Between Aristotle's Rhetoric and Ancient Chinese Rhetoric

Differences between AristotleЎЇs Rhetoric and Ancient Chinese Rhetoric

Theories develop and evolve in particular cultural contexts. When I finish reading AristotleЎЇs Rhetoric, I began to think about the rhetoric in ancient China. Since I grew up in a typical eastern culture, according to my understanding towards both cultures, there are similarities and differences existing between AristotleЎЇs rhetoric and ancient Chinese rhetoric. IЎЇll give a general analysis of those differences in terms of morphology of theory, as this comparison contains important pragmatic significance.

First of all, rhetoric is a separate discipline since ancient times in the West; but it has never been officially codified as a separate discipline by ancient Chinese scholars. In Qin Dynasty (221 BC - 206 BC), the major schools of thought, such as Confucianism, Daoism, Mohism and Legalism, had their own thoughts about rhetoric. But none of their scholars had any treatise on rhetoric. Instead, their rhetoric relied heavily on the particular ethic and political theories. Qin Dynasty is the cradle of Chinese culture, so since then, during the thousands of years, ancient Chinese rhetoric has been dependent on other subjects. As a result, until today, it hasnЎЇt been developed systematically and separately. However, in the West, Aristotle established a separate subject called ÐŽorhetoricÐŽ± with his famous work. He proposed the definition, techniques, principles of rhetoric, which made it a systematical and independent subject.

Second, Aristotle analyzed the detailed elements in rhetorical theories; but ancient Chinese preferred analyzing rhetorical theories as an integral concept. Chinese tend to perceive things in a direct and integral way, rather than decomposing them into basic elements. For example, Poetic Qualities by Situ Kong is a treatise on stylistics in Tang Dynasty, which categorized the styles of poem into twenty-four kinds. But how about the elements which constitute ÐŽostyleÐŽ±? We can not find any analysis or explanation about the elements of style in that book. However, Aristotle paid much attention to those basic elements. For instance, he suggested that ÐŽowe must arrange what we have to say about each of them (the emotions) under three headsÐŽ­ÐŽ­what the state of mindÐŽ­ÐŽ­who the people areÐŽ­ÐŽ­on what groundsÐŽ­ÐŽ­ÐŽ± (Aristotle, p. 92). His analysis was like a scalpel, which anatomized a theory into several components.

Last, AristotleЎЇs rhetoric is a system of abstraction; but ancient Chinese rhetoric is a system of visualization. Ancient Chinese rhetoric