272 Harry M. Huhhell, Ph.D., 



elsewhere ; and we shall also discuss elsewhere why they fre- 

 quent the schools. This improvement does not demonstrate that 

 rhetoric is an art for it is possible for speakers to improve by 

 practice and experience. 

 I, 36. 24 ff. [If it were not an art] "the majority of the students would 



= buppl. 19, ^^ become eood, but inefficient." Yet we see at times some 

 24 ff. . 



without art producing" more and better speakers than those who 



possess accurate knowledge ; this proves that it is not an art. 

 Some leave the study of sophistic to the child, and afterward 

 give the youth the benefit of association with those who have 

 had practical experience in the assembly and courts. Then if 

 they succeed they are said to have studied with sophists, and 

 the sophists get the credit for giving them the training which 

 they have received from another source. 

 I. 38, 5ff-= "Lawvers and statesmen send their sons to the sophists to 

 J7 fY. " ' pursue those studies which gave them their ability." In the first 

 place some insist that they wasted the time which they spent in 

 study with the sophists, and send their sons to their own 

 teacher — the people. However if they do send them to the 

 sophists it is because they do not want their sons to be deprived 

 of any possible advantage to be obtained at the rhetorical schools, 

 but they do not expect the school to produce a trained statesman. 

 Some send their sons to the rhetoricians merely for a liberal 

 education, putting rhetoric on a par with other studies. 

 I, 40, 18 ff. "As in music and grammar so in rhetoric there is a transmis- 



—^ upp . 2 , ^.^^ ^^ knowledge from teacher to pvipil, and the training is not 

 without method." There may be a transmission of knowledge 

 which is not connected with an art but acquired by experience 

 and observation. The statement that "the training is not with- 

 out method" is mere assertion without any argument to support 

 it. If the statement means that sophistic is an art of practical 

 speaking it is entirely wrong. (Lacuna.) In publishing tech- 

 nical works they are like the Chaldaeans and prophets who give 

 out dreams to deceive the people, and are themselves deceived. 

 If we grant anything we grant that sophistic is an art ; but not 

 even those who teach it believe that it is an art of politics. 

 I, 42, 17 ff. [If there were no art of rhetoric] "none of those who speak 



=^Suppl. 22, pQ^ve,.f^i]iy .^nd intelligently would speak artistically." We may 

 turn the argument around and say that if some speak artistically 

 before the court or the assembly the graduates of the schools 



