SORITE
The word sorite comes from the Greek word soros, which means, “heap”.
A sorite is a discourse that progresses by repeating the same syntactic form, with the same discursive function.
1. The Sorite Paradox
The sorite of the heap is one of the famous paradoxes proposed by Eubulide, a Greek philosopher, contemporary of Aristotle. The paradox progresses by repeating the same action:
One grain of wheat is not enough to make a heap of wheat, nor two grains, nor three grains, and so on.
In other words, if n grains do not make a heap, then n + 1 will not make a heap.
So no number of grains of wheat can make up a heap of wheat.
Similarly, and if you take one grain out of a heap of wheat, you still have a heap of wheat, and so on, down to the last grain. So, a grain of wheat is itself a heap of wheat. [1]
This paradox can be illustrated by any collective name: cluster, crowd, flock, army, collection, bouquet, collective…
2. Rhetorical Sorite
A rhetorical sorite (gradatio, climax) is a discourse that progresses by repeating the same cause-effect, begetter-begotten relationship, or simply a temporal sequence of related events, building up to a climax, as in the following poem:
Cursed be
The father of the woman
Of the blacksmith who forged the iron of the axe
With which the woodcutter fell the oak
In which was carved the bed
Where the great-grandfather was born
Of the man who drove the car
In which your mother
Met your father!
Robert Desnos, [The Dove of the Ark], [1923]. [2]
3. Logical Sorite
In logic, the term sorite is sometimes used to refer to a polysyllogism, a chain of syllogisms in which the conclusion of rhe preceding syllogism is used as a premise for the next.
Serial argumentation corresponds to the same phenomenon.
The « heap » property is common to sorites properly speaking, to polysyllogism and to linked argumentation, but the mechanisms of concatenation are specific to each case.
4. Chinese Sorite
The term « Chinese sorite » or « Confucian sorite » is used by Masson-Oursel ([1912], p. 17) to designate « arguments [argumentations] expressing a sequence of means implemented by human activity in view of an end » (1912, p. 20). Eno (2016, p.11) speaks of “sorite” or “chain syllogism”[2].
The sorite posits a desirable state and considers the stages on way to it. The progressive sorite starts from the first stage and proceeds to the final goal. The source of the progression may be considered causal, instrumental or indeterminate, in which case the succession appears purely temporal.
The regressive sorite states the goal and enumerates the stages backwards, to the first, basic stage.
In the short Confucian treatise The Great Learning, a regressive sorite is immediately followed by a progressive sorite with identical content. Regressive sorite:
In ancient times, those who wished to make bright virtue brilliant in the world first ordered their states; those who wished to order their states first aligned their households; those who wished to align their households first refined their persons; those who wished to refine their persons first balanced their minds; those who wished to balance their minds first perfected the genuineness of their intentions; those who wished to perfect the genuineness of their intentions first extended their understanding; extending one’s understanding lies in aligning affairs.
The Great Learning, R. Eno, p. 12
In the progressive sorite, « the first condition spreads, as it were, into new conditions which arise from each other. Thus, in Mencius IV, 1, § 27, each term is united with the next by the expression: ‘the main fruit (chĕu) of A is B' ». (Id., p. 19). The preceding regressive sorite corresponds to the following progressive sorite:
Only after affairs have been aligned may one’s understanding be fully extended. Only after one’s understanding is fully extended may one’s intentions be perfectly genuine. Only after one’s intentions are perfectly genuine may one’s mind be balanced. Only after one’s mind is balanced may one’s person be refined. Only after one’s person is refined may one’s household be aligned. Only after one’s household is aligned may one’s state be ordered. Only after one’s state is ordered may the world be set at peace.
The Great Learning. R. Eno, p. 12
The difference between the progressive and regressive sorites is purely in the textual organization of the steps that make them up. These steps are listed in the form of a parallelism: « if A, then B« . This expression belongs to the « if… then… » family, which is used to indicate the logical implication that gives the sorite the appearance of reasoning. Masson-Oursel proposes a second formulation that expresses the progression (or regression) characteristic of the sorite:
Each step forward represents an anticipation that is subsequently justified, thanks to the formula: « in view of B, there is a way, a path to follow (yeou tao); A being given, then (seu) B is given. (Masson Oursel, 1912, p. 20).
These sorites describe a cursus educationis, the Confucian program of education. Progress along this path is not determined by any logical or causal inference. It is a way shown by the master to his privileged disciples, leading to the fulfillment of their human nature.
[1] The concept of a heap is three-dimensional, typically pyramid-shaped. Two or three grains cannot constitute a heap because they do not fit, or fit poorly, on top of each other, the heap is not stable. On the other hand, it is possible to form a heap of four grains, from a base of three grains. Therefore, we could say that the heap of grains starts with four grains.
[2] Robert Desnos, La Colombe de l’Arche, 1923. In Œuvres [Works]. Paris: Gallimard, Quarto, 1999, p. 536.
[3] http://hdl.handle.net/2022/234242