论题篇

The Topics (Ancient Greek: Τοπικά; Latin: Topica) is the name given to one of Aristotle's six works on logic collectively known as the Organon. In Andronicus of Rhodes' arrangement it is the fifth of these six works.

The treatise presents the art of dialectic - the invention and discovery of arguments in which the propositions rest upon commonly held opinions or endoxa (ἔνδοξα in Greek). Topoi (τόποι) are "places" from which such arguments can be discovered or invented.

What is a topic?

In his treatise Topics, Aristotle does not explicitly define topic, though it is "at least primarily a strategy for argument not infrequently justified or explained by a principle". He characterises it in the Rhetoric thus: "I call the same thing element and topic; for an element or a topic is a heading under which many enthymemes fall." By element, he means a general form under which enthymemes of the same type can be included. Thus, a topic is a general argument source, from which the individual arguments are instances, and is a template from which many individual arguments can be constructed. The word topic derives from ancient Greek tópos (literally "place, location").

Connection to Aristotle's theory of the syllogism

Though the Topics, as a whole, does not deal directly with syllogism, clearly Aristotle contemplates the use of topics as places from which dialectical arguments (i.e. arguments using endoxa) may be derived. This is evidenced by the fact that the introduction to the Topics contains and relies upon his definition of reasoning (syllogismós): a verbal expression (logos) in which, certain things having been laid down, other things necessarily follow. Dialectical reasoning is thereafter divided by Aristotle into inductive and deductive parts. The endoxa themselves are sometimes, but not always, set out in a propositional form (i.e. an express major or minor proposition), from which the complete syllogism may be constructed. Often, such construction is left as a task to the speaker; Aristotle gives only the general strategy for argument, leaving the construction of propositions to the creativity of the answerer.

Book I

Book I is introductory, laying down a number of preliminary principles upon which dialectical argumentation proceeds. Aristotle first lists out five types of endoxa which one can begin reasoning from:

the views of everyone;

the views of the preponderant majority;

the views of the recognized experts;

the views of all the experts;

the views of the most famous.

Aristotle then defines three types of reasoning in an argument:

Dialectical - reasoning from opinions generally accepted

Demonstrative - reasoning from premises that are true and primary, or from knowledge coming through those premises

Contentious - reasoning from opinions that only seem to be generally accepted but are not really

Aristotle proceeds to note the utility of the art of dialectic, then presents four materials used in dialectical argument: accident (or incidental), property, genus, and definition. He also explains the various senses of sameness, that bear directly upon the character of arguments, as follows.

Number (the referent has more than one name, like doublet and cloak)

Specifically (the same species)

Generally (the same genus)

Then, the means (organa) by which arguments may be obtained are described:

securing propositions figuring out the number of senses of a term finding differences investigating similarity

Methods and rationale for attaining each of these ends are briefly illustrated and explained. In particular, there is an analysis of how to find the different senses of a term.

Contraries (the opposite of sharp is flat, which might refer to notes or solid edges)

Sometimes words are ambiguous (the opposite of love is hate, but the physical activity of love has no opposite)

Differences of kind (a clear color versus a clear sound)

In relation to the deprivation or presence of a state (states such as when using your senses)

Inflected forms (if "justify" has more than one sense, then so will "justly")

Signified predicates (good food signifies something different from good medicine)

Distinct genera (for example, river bank versus a bank the institution)

Comparability (a sharp note can't be more sharp than a sharp flavor)

Distinct differentia (sharp note, sharp flavor, different differentiae)

As species or differentia (color of a body, versus clarity of a note)

Book II

Book II is devoted to topics relating to arguments where an "accident" (i.e. non-essential attribute, or an incidental attribute) is predicated of a subject.

There are important considerations when dealing with these arguments. Is something called accidental when it should be ascribed differently? Examine cases where a predicate has been asserted or denied universally to belong to something. Define terms, even accidental terms. Define what you think should be called by what most people call them. The reason is that sometimes you need the definition a doctor uses, sometimes the definition used by most people. You can also alter terms into more familiar ones so that the thesis becomes easier to attack.

Sometimes, opponents should be drawn to make statements that you can easily respond to. This is necessary when the answerer has denied useful statements for you to attack the thesis. It is apparently necessary when someone makes a derivative statement. It is not necessary in any sense when the opponent has made statements that are unrelated to the thesis, and you should concede the point if it's true because it makes no difference to the thesis anyway.