Review: Logic vs. Rhetoric | Syllogism vs. Enthymeme
Below is the transcript of a decent overview of the difference between the syllogism and the enthymeme, and more broadly, logical reasoning vs. rhetorical persuasion–what we have been exploring in our initial discussions of rhetoric, documentary, and the Central Park Five. It was generated by Google’s new AI-search, Gemini.
We can extend the logic vs. rhetoric dynamic to AI. AI, built upon computational, mathematical, algorithmic logic, is thoroughly logical–updating of the syllogism. But the human use of any output generated by AI is a matter of rhetorical persuasion: information in need of interpretation, re-presenting.
Is there a place for AI and other artificial technologies in rhetorical invention? There has been from the beginning. One could argue that rhetoric itself is a technology that enables humans to artificially extend their powers of thinking into speech, memory, and composition. The “artistic” evidence or proof that is central to rhetorical persuasion, which refers to the shaping and composing of argument by human hands and minds, shares roots with artificial.
So, yes, you might find some AI-tools useful. But focus on them not for generating your own ideas or writing, but as tools for putting existing ideas and texts (which can and should be sourced) into conversation and composition with your emerging ideas and writing.
My AI guidelines, included in the syllabus under Academic Integrity:
Washington College has the following policy regarding academic integrity and plagiarism: Plagiarism is defined by the Honor Code as “willfully presenting the language, ideas, or thoughts of another person as one’s original work.” Turning in the work of someone else (or something else in the use of an AI tool) and representing it as your own is plagiarism. Relying on other texts, resources, and intelligence (both human and artificial) to generate our work is basic to what we do as scholars and writers. Acknowledging those resources is also basic to what we do. For that reason, quoting or paraphrasing or otherwise using the words or ideas of other people and resources (such as Wikipedia or ChatGPT) without properly acknowledging your source is also a problem. If you ever have any question at all about whether you are using a source correctly, ask me about it to learn more. We will be talking and learning more about the rhetorical uses and potential abuses of artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT (including two concerns you should keep in mind: AI can fabricate information and sources; the companies are not concerned with your data privacy). My guideline is that if you use any language (phrase, sentence, or longer) generated by an AI or other digital tool, it must be cited like any other reference to a text. Submitting a paper for this class that contains all or part of a paper that you submitted in another class, without the permission of both professors involved, is also a violation of the Honor Code. A student found guilty of plagiarism may fail the assignment or the course, and may be referred to the Honor Board for further adjudication. Whenever you hand in a paper for this course, you will include as part of a preface an acknowledgement of the resources you have relied upon and a statement that your work has been completed in accordance with the Honor Code.
Integrity suggests wholeness; a synonym would be ecology. Your integrity affects the integrity of the whole learning environment here, in the class (where you are relying upon the response of your peers) and on campus. We will be talking further about the integrity of your writing and the ways that your writing can be inventive without being plagiarized. The point is that I take plagiarism seriously, but as such, also want you to learn and ask questions about it.
Logic vs. Rhetoric (transcript from Google’s Gemini):
What’s the difference between a syllogism and an enthymeme?
volume_up
Syllogisms and enthymemes are both forms of deductive reasoning, but they have some key differences:
Structure:
- Syllogism: A complete formal argument with three explicitly stated propositions:
- Major premise: A general statement accepted as true.
- Minor premise: A specific statement about something related to the major premise.
- Conclusion: A logical deduction based on the two premises.
- Enthymeme: An incomplete syllogism where one or more parts (usually a premise) are left unstated. The audience is expected to fill in the missing information based on their shared knowledge or context.
Certainty:
- Syllogism: Aims for absolute certainty based on universally accepted truths. If the premises are true, the conclusion must necessarily be true.
- Enthymeme: Deals with probabilities and relies on shared beliefs or common knowledge. The conclusion is usually likely, not guaranteed.
Purpose:
- Syllogism: Used in logic and mathematics to demonstrate the validity of an argument.
- Enthymeme: Used in rhetoric and persuasion to convince or inspire an audience. Appeals to emotions and shared values alongside logic.
Examples:
- Syllogism: All humans are mortal (major premise). Socrates is a human (minor premise). Therefore, Socrates is mortal (conclusion).
- Enthymeme: He’s always been honest (unstated premise: honest people are trustworthy). You can trust him (conclusion).
In short:
- Syllogism: Formal, complete, seeks absolute certainty.
- Enthymeme: Informal, incomplete, uses probabilities and shared knowledge to persuade.
I hope this clarifies the differences!
Available Means 