Collections (3): Tradition and Modernity

1. Scipion Dupleix,
Logic, or the art of speaking and Thinking (1607)

Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet, Logic for the Dauphin (1677)

These works most probably have no particular historical importance, yet they certainly provide an idea of seventeenth century terminology, clearly akin to the Ciceronian system, S. Collections (2).

As the title suggests, Bossuet’s Logic functions as a pedagogical guide to everyday argumentation: ‘Dauphin’ was the title given to the heir of the French Kingdom.

— First column, Bossuet, 1677
— Second column, Dupleix, 1607

The order of the lines is that of Bossuet. To facilitate reading, the order of Dupleix was changed, so that the same types of arguments are on the same line; the numbering corresponds to the order in Dupleix’s typology.

Bossuet, 1677

Dupleix, 1607
1. Etymology 3. Etymology
2. Conjugates 4. Conjugata
3. Definition 1. Definition
4. Division
5. Genus 5. Genus and Species
6. Species
7. Property
8. Accident
9. Resemblance

10. Dissemblance

6. Similitude,

7. Dissimilitude

11. Cause 13. Cause
12. Effects 14. Effects
13. What comes before1 10. Antecedents1
14. What accompanies1 9. Adjuncts or conjuncts1
15. What follows1 11. Consequents1
16. Contraries 8. Contraries
17. A repugnantibus3
12. Repugnants
18. All and parts2 2. Enumeration of the parts2
19. Comparison 15. Comparison with things bigger, equal and smaller
20. Example, or Induction

(1) S. Circumstances

(2) Bossuet’s topic n°18, “enumeration of the parts” is akin to the topic of definition. For example, what is a “good captain” is defined by enumeration of his relevant qualities: brave, wise, etc. Dupleix’s topic n°2, “all and parts” relates more to composition and division

(3) Dupleix’s topic n°12, from “repugnants” refers to predication: “stone” and “man” are repugnant because “ — be a stone” cannot be said of man — Whereas Bossuet’s topic n°17, “a repugnantibus”, refers to a kind of ad hominem.

Both typologies prioritize arguments exploiting the resources contributing to the definition of a word or a concept, in view of their exploitation in syllogistic reasoning. This enumeration of the core set of arguments is followed by the usual enumeration of arguments schemes drawing on causality, analogy, comparison, peripheral circumstances, opposites and induction. This set will reemerge under a new re-organization in the New Rhetoric.

2. John Locke,
An Essay concerning Human Understanding (1690)

Wilhelm Leibniz,
New Essays Concerning Human Understanding (1765)

In An Essay concerning Human Understanding John Locke briefly mentions “four sorts of arguments, that men, in their reasoning with others, do ordinarily make use of to prevail on their assent; or at least so to awe them as to silence their opposition” (IV, 17, “Of Reason”, § 19-22; p. 410). These four arguments are:

— ad verecundiam, S. Ethos; 
Modesty; Authority.
— ad ignorantiam, S. Ignorance.
— ad hominem, S. Ad hominem.
— ad judicium, S. Matter

In his New Essays Concerning Human Understanding, Leibniz comments on this list, and qualifies Locke’s abrupt and general condemnation by taking into consideration the circumstances; see the above mentioned entries. In addition, Leibniz adds a new kind of argument, the argument ad vertiginem, S. Vertigo.

This brief list has nothing to do with the previous Ciceronian ones; its aim is to oppose the first three fallacious arguments to the last one, the only one to “bring true instruction with it, and advance us in our way to knowledge” (op. cit., p. 411). Reasoning and the methods used in mathematics and experimental sciences are introduced under the heading ad judicium. Contrary to the classical typologies, these arguments are not associated to a logic itself backed by a natural ontology, but rather to the requirements of scientific method, S. Fallacy. We are thus entering a new argumentative world.

3. Jeremy Bentham, The Book of fallacies (1824)

S. Political Arguments.