Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:49:53.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Polite Passionate Persuasion: Hume's Conception of Rhetoric

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2010

Marc Hanvelt
Marc Hanvelt*
Affiliation:
Carleton University
*
Marc Hanvelt, Department of Political Science, Room B640 Loeb Building, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, marc_hanvelt@carleton.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. While confronting questions about the negative political effects of faction and fanaticism, David Hume developed a distinction between the manipulative rhetoric of the fanatics and the factional leaders and a good form of rhetoric that I term accurate, just, and polite. This high form of rhetoric combines Hume's philosophy of just reasoning with the rhetorical style of an idealized Demosthenes and eighteenth-century standards of politeness. Understanding Hume's conception of rhetoric is important for understanding the full scope of his political philosophy. In addition, further study of his conception of rhetoric could provide a valuable avenue of research for contemporary liberal theorists seeking to develop normative models of judgment and deliberation.

Résumé. En réfléchissant aux effets négatifs du factionnalisme et du fanatatisme, David Hume a établi une distinction entre la rhétorique manipulatrice des leaders factionnaires et fanatiques, et une rhétorique que je qualifie ici de correcte, juste et polie. Cette dernière s'inspire de la philosophie du juste raisonnement de Hume, mais aussi d'un style de rhétorique associé à Demosthenes, érigé ici en idéal, ainsi que des standards de politesse du dix-huitième siècle. Cette conception de la rhétorique joue un rôle important dans la philosophie politique de Hume et pourrait constituer une avenue de recherche intéressante pour les penseurs libéraux contemporains qui cherchent à développer des modèles normatifs de jugement et de délibération.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 565 - 581
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aristotle. 1985. The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. Barnes, Jonathan. 2 vols.Princeton NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Baier, Annette C. 1991. A Progress of Sentiments: Reflections on Hume's Treatise. Cambridge MA.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Box, M.A. 1990. The Suasive Art of David Hume. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cicero, Marcus Tullius. 2001. Cicero: On the Ideal Orator, trans. May, James M. and Wisse, Jakob. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Conley, Thomas M. 2003. “Rhetoric.” In Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment, ed. Kors, Alan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Garrett, Don. 1997. Cognition and Commitment in Hume's Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1999. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. trans. Rehg, William. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Herdt, Jennifer A. 1997. Religion and Faction in Hume's Moral Philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1978 [1739–1740].A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. Selby-Bigge, L.A., rev. Nidditch, P.H.. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1987 [1741–1742].Essays Moral, Political, and Literary, ed. Miller, Eugene F.. Indianapolis: Liberty Classics.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1975 [1748].Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals, ed. Selby-Bigge, L.A., Nidditch, rev. P.H.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, David. 1957 [1757].Natural History of Religion, ed. Root, H.E.. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1983 [1778].The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution in 1688. 6 vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Classics.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1970 [1779].Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, ed. Pike, Nelson. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1932. The Letters of David Hume, ed. Greig, J.Y.T.. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1954. New Letters of David Hume, ed. Klibansky, Raymond and Mossner, Ernest C.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Peter. 1982. Hume's Sentiments: Their Ciceronian and French Context. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press.Google Scholar
Klein, Lawrence E. 1994. Shaftesbury and the Culture of Politeness: Moral Discourse and Cultural Politics in Early Eighteenth-Century England. Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Krause, Sharon. 2008. Civil Passions: Moral Sentiment and Democratic Deliberation. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livingston, Donald W. 1995. “On Hume's Conservatism.” Hume Studies XXI (2): 151–64.Google Scholar
Miller, Stephen. 2001. Three Deaths and Enlightenment Thought. London: Associated University Presses.Google Scholar
Plutarch. 1982 [1683].Plutarch's Lives Translated from the Greek by Several Hands, trans. Dryden, John. Franklin Center PA: The Franklin Library.Google Scholar
Pocock, J.G.A. 1985. Virtue Commerce and History: Essays on Political Thought and History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Potkay, Adam. 1994. The Fate of Eloquence in the Age of Hume. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2005. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Whelan, Frederick G. 1985. Order and Artifice in Hume's Political Philosophy. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar