The paper aims to analyze the deliberation-way of the Athenians, especially according to Demosthenes’ point of view. The orator blames his fellow-citizens for their fickleness, their inconsistency and incongruity, their tendency to withdraw themselves from responsibilities, when they gather in Assembly in order to take a resolution. Which reason, if any, lies behind this criticism? In accordance with the circumstances, the orator asks for a rational debate or prepares in the way he wants the attitude of the audience; he can appreciate or blame it; and the attitude rebuked could be understood both as a fact as well as a provocative warning. Moreover Athenian people, bringing actions like eisangelia, probole, or graphe paranomon against rhetores who have cheated it, wants to reaffirm the right and non-culpable exercise of its sovereignty and the non-responsibility for the vote it has given taking their advice. But these procedures are at the same time tools rhetores exploit not just for moral principle, but rather for individualistic reasons in the political struggle between them

Le considerazioni dell’oratore Demostene sui meccanismi decisionali collettivi nell’Atene del IV sec. a. C / Pasini, Gianluca. - In: RIVISTA ITALIANA DI FILOSOFIA DEL LINGUAGGIO. - ISSN 2036-6728. - Building Consensus (2016)(2016), pp. 199-218. ((Intervento presentato al convegno Building consensus. Rhetoric between democracy and conflict tenutosi a Palermo; Italy.

Le considerazioni dell’oratore Demostene sui meccanismi decisionali collettivi nell’Atene del IV sec. a. C.

Gianluca Pasini
2016

Abstract

The paper aims to analyze the deliberation-way of the Athenians, especially according to Demosthenes’ point of view. The orator blames his fellow-citizens for their fickleness, their inconsistency and incongruity, their tendency to withdraw themselves from responsibilities, when they gather in Assembly in order to take a resolution. Which reason, if any, lies behind this criticism? In accordance with the circumstances, the orator asks for a rational debate or prepares in the way he wants the attitude of the audience; he can appreciate or blame it; and the attitude rebuked could be understood both as a fact as well as a provocative warning. Moreover Athenian people, bringing actions like eisangelia, probole, or graphe paranomon against rhetores who have cheated it, wants to reaffirm the right and non-culpable exercise of its sovereignty and the non-responsibility for the vote it has given taking their advice. But these procedures are at the same time tools rhetores exploit not just for moral principle, but rather for individualistic reasons in the political struggle between them
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Pasini_Considerazioni-del'loratore_2016.pdf

accesso aperto

Note: http://160.97.104.70/index.php/rifl/article/view/387
Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 453.16 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
453.16 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1341197
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact