TJic Rhctorica of Pliilodemus. 375 



result of the intensity of controversy. From the very beginning 

 of the discussion there had been a division of opinion as to 

 whether words or things were the subject matter of rhetoric. 

 But the rise of the sceptical philosophy made it more advan- 

 tageous for the purposes of polemic to assume that rhetoric dealt 

 with words. Accordingly Sextus disregards all phases of the 

 question except this. He assumes that rhetoric deals with 

 words (48), and on the lines of the sceptical philosophy he proves 

 that as words are composed of syllables, and syllables do not 

 exist, therefore words do not exist, and as there can be no art 

 of a nonentity, there is no art of rhetoric. (Adv. Grammaticos, 

 p. 131 ff.) 



In the collection of arguments which Philodemus has assembled 

 in his second book there is one which appears also in Sextus, 

 and which is confused by Quintilian with another similar but 

 different argument. In Philodemus it runs as follows : "In 

 other arts the rules are true, in rhetoric they are false" ; to 

 which Philodemus replies that the same phenomenon occurs in 

 medicine or music which every one grants are arts ; and even in 

 philosophy men sometimes enunciate principles which prove to 

 be false, but that does not vitiate all philosophy.^ This passage 

 may be illustrated by comparison with Sextus 10-12, who gives 

 the reason why rhetoric cannot be an art if its rules are false. 

 He adopts the Stoic definition of art ; Uaa-a toivw re^vi? o-vaTrjixd 



ecrrtv €k KaTaXyjif/ewv (JvyyeyviJ.vaa ijl€V(x>v Kat Ittl T£ko<i ev)(prjaTov rw ;8ta> 

 \afx(3av6vTwv ttjv dva</)opav (lo). The second part of this definition, 

 that an art is useful, agrees in thought with Plato's requirements 

 given in the Gorgias 501B, and was recognized as fundamental 

 Academic doctrine (Sextus 43). Sextus continues to argue that 

 rhetoric is not an art because it is not a a-va-Trj/xa Ik KaTaXrjiptMv, 

 for there can be no perception of the false, but the rules of 

 rhetoric are false — il^tvSrj 8e ecm to. Xeyofxeva Trj<; prjTOfjiKrj'i dvaL 



OtoiprjimTu. He then gives examples of the false rules ovro) 



TrapaTTCiCTTeov tovs StKaoras Kat opyrjv KivrjTeov rj ekeov kol p-oixw 

 avvrjyoprjTiov rj UpoavXw. 



The other argument occurs in several places in Philodemus, 



° I, 22, col. Ill = Suppl. 12, 18; " Kara ras ^XXas t^x'''^' "''" deuprjiKxra icrriv 

 d\Ti6i], i/'ei;5'^ 5^ (card rrjv prjTopiK'^v," Atd toOto oi/5^ ttji/ (pL\o(TO(pLav t^x^'V pT)Tiov 

 ov5k TTjv laTpi.K-qv kt\. 



