Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2002. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 231-248).

Thesis (doctoral)--Amsterdam, 1915. / Includes bibliographical references.

Inaug.-diss.--Munich. / Lebenslauf. "Literatur": p. v-vii.

This dissertation draws attention to reciprocal influences linking the arts and sciences, represented respectively here by two seemingly disparate subjects--Rhetoric and Medicine. Both of these disciplines, I argue, share a long and intersecting history with one another still visible in the fifth- and fourth-century BCE Greece, when they began to develop separately and to be thought of as distinct disciplines. Exploring the historical connections between Rhetoric and Medicine in the Classical period offers us food for thought for bridging the gap between the arts and sciences today because it obliges us to recognize the historical intersections between them, the mutual influence each had upon the other, as well as the acknowledgment of these intersections and these influences by the ancient Greeks. The chapters that follow explore links between Rhetoric and Medicine on practical, professional, and theoretical levels. Following the introduction, chapter two investigates the therapeutic functioning of words in ancient Greece and finds that the influence of medicine on rhetoric extends from the usage of healing words in the Homeric epics through the rhetorical practices of healing in Antiphon, to the influence of medicine on the theory of persuasion in Gorgias. Chapter three explores the influence of medicine on rhetoric as it registers in Plato. The chapter shows that the clear-cut division Plato imposed onto Rhetoric and Medicine breaks down in the Phaedrus and that Plato's project to reframe Rhetoric as a true art borrows heavily from Medicine. While chapters two and three deal with the influence of medicine on rhetoric, the next two chapters turn in the opposite direction to explore the influence that rhetoric exerted on medicine. Chapter four demonstrates the prevalence of rhetorical issues about disciplinarity in the Hippocratic Corpus. Chapter five continues to explore this influence, this time arguing that Hippocratic physicians used rhetoric to craft an identity for themselves vis-à-vis other medical healers of the time. Finally, chapter six shows how the mutual and reciprocal influences between rhetoric and medicine, demonstrated through the previous chapters, can be tapped to pave the way for future possibilities in the contemporary study of Rhetoric and Medicine.

This thesis argues that the most prominent account of Protagoras in contemporary rhetorical scholarship, Edward Schiappa's Protagoras and Logos, loses critical historiographical objectivity in Platonic overdetermination of surviving historical artifacts. In the first chapter, I examine scholarship from the past thirty years to set a baseline for historiographical thought and argue that John Muckelbauer's conception of productive reading offers the best solution to the intellectual and discursive impasse in which contemporary Protagorean rhetorical theory currently resides. The second chapter explains the pitfalls of Platonic overdetermination and the ways in which Plato himself was inextricably situated within an ideological blinder, from which fair treatment of competing philosophical ideology becomes impossible. Finally, I argue for a historical Protagoras free of Platonic overdetermination by looking to Mario Untersteiner's 1954 Sophists. Untersteiner looks to Plato not for an accurate historical account, but for insight into why the great philosopher found the sophists to be such great perturbations. Rediscovering Protagoras through a Sophistic paradigm, I hope to open space for new, productive discourse on the first Sophist.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Michigan State University. Dept. of Political Science, 2006. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on June 19, 2009) Includes bibliographical references (p. 403-405). Also issued in print.

Tradução e estudo dos discursos para Demônico, para Nícocles, Nícocles, e Evágoras de Isócrates. A introdução se concentra na relação de Isócrates com a tradição poética grega. / Translation and study of the speeches to Demonicus, to Nicocles, Nicocles, and Evagoras of Isocrates. The introduction focuses on Isocrates\' use of the Greek poetic tradition.

This dissertation translates an essay by Mario Untersteiner "Le origini sociali della sofistica" ("The Social Origins of Sophistry") unpublished in English, and explores its significance in terms of classical and contemporary rhetorical theory, as well as the composition classroom. In the process, I attempt to contribute to reestablishing sophistry and rhetoric within our contemporary cultural milieu. More specifically, the dissertation is organized into five main parts: The first chapter offers an introduction to and thorough background of the sophists in ancient and classical Greece; the second chapter reviews the scholarship about the sophists, as well as that on Mario Untersteiner and his "Le origini," exploring the commonly known difficulties of translation. Chapter three provides my translation of the complete essay, while chapter four presents my interpretation of the most salient issues in the essay and their importance to classical rhetorical theory. The concluding chapter presents my conclusions and relates my findings to the composition classroom, the university, and society at large, arguing for the reintegration of certain sophistical rhetorical theories and practices.

Claudius Aelianus was recognized by Philostratus and the author of the Suda as a participant in the literary and intellectual movement of the Second Sophistic. Philostratus' biographical sketch in the Lives of the Sophists, however, makes it clear that Aelian did not perform publicly as did the other sophists whom Philostratus described; Aelian's retiring and scholarly nature is emphasized by Philostratus, who implies that Aelian's choice of literature over performance followed a pattern established by Demosthenes and Cicero. Most scholarship on the Varia Historia during the past 150 years addresses the question how Aelian made his collection, i.e. what sources he accessed. This directly reflects modern use of the Varia Historia as a quarry from which to mine information about the ancient world. Such scholarship must conclude that Aelian was not a modern research scholar with the goals, techniques, and readership of the modern "scientific" historian. What then were his goals, techniques, and readership? The Varia Historia cannot be fairly assessed without taking into account its membership in the genre of the miscellany. The Imperial miscellanist concerns himself with a specific subset of traditional literature: the material which supplements the standard literary education and may be termed polymathic. The miscellanist assumes a readership with whom he shares certain educative goals: specifically, further detailed education in literature beyond the primary level, including further work in the encyclic artes and a general increase in detailed information "for its own sake." Because the miscellanist adopts the stance of a mature amateur scholar gathering data for a younger reader, he reveals a patronizing tone in his collection. The data the miscellanist offers his reader is presented in a manner characterized by rroiKiXia or "variety"; as such it reflects the Imperial attitude toward the cultured person's correct use of leisure. An analysis of passages from the Varia Historia reveals that Aelian conceives his reader as a young person currently in the process of acquiring paideia. In his miscellany Aelian has provided this reader with material that conveys a moral message at the same time that it provides models of the correct way to respond to traditional literature.