من الحجاج الإغريقي إلى البلاغة الجديدة لبيرلمان

الملخص EN

Theorizing the Western rhetoric in Greece was based on political, social, judicial, and other philosophical backgrounds, and it was fueled by various intellectual trends, there was a sophist rhetoric that does not concern other than persuasion under any circumstance whatsoever and does not believe in absolute truth, and the Platonic argument with a mental authority and an idealistic view that secures In absolute truth, and a trend in which Aristotle mediated between (the sophist rhetoric) and (the Platonic Controversy), he took what agreed between them being two industries and who were aiming to influence, but Aristotle took a new analytical path in which he took from the first the identification of persuasive techniques, and left the fallacy and The For the purposes of which no morals or virtue do not prevent him, and from the second he took his focus on reason, truth and good, and left from him high idealism and distance from reality, so he had a rhetoric other than the rhetoric of the Sophists and a controversy other than the Platonic Controversy and that which he presented in his book (Rhetoric), Then the centuries later followed eloquence in the runways of changes, but they witnessed the most important development in the twentieth century when it expanded and was affected by modern approaches and became concerned with describing the rules of discourse and literary races and classification of images and improvements and clarify their functions, and pilgrims expanded in them to study philosophical and moral discourses and Social and social With Shayem Perelman, who absorbed the Western rhetorical heritage, including Aristotelian and classical, then sifted it, coordinated it and added to it, and presented it in a new garment that corresponds to the spirit of the modern era, so the new rhetoric appeared on his hands in 1958 in the book (Classified in Pilgrims, New Rhetoric) Which aims to rid the pilgrims of two charges: -His accusation of being a member of the Soviet public speaking, because of its fallacy, maneuvering and manipulation.

-The charge of the strictness of the Platonic and Aristotelian reasoning, which makes the addressee in a subject of subjugation and alienation and besieging his mind, taking advantage of his awareness and lack of eloquence.