Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aristotle’s Rhetoric is our first surviving work to divide oratory into three types ( eidē ) or species ( genē ): “deliberative” ( sumbouleutikon ); “forensic” or “dicanic” ( dikanikon ); “epideictic” or “display” or “demonstrative” ( epideiktikon ). This threefold classification is an important structuring principle in the philosopher’s attempt to establish that rhetoric is a proper “art” (tekhnē). Aristotle’s vision of rhetoric is that it be a practical discourse; an important counterpart to philosophical dialectic in a real-world setting where a speaker is seeking the best available means of persuasion in the face of mass audiences (Aristotle, Rhetoric 1358a36-b8). Aristotle explains that there are three types of rhetorikē because there are three kinds of “hearers” of speeches (1358a37–b6): epideictic oratory is directed at the spectator (theōros), who judges the ability of the speaker. The hearer of forensic oratory judges things that have already happened while the “deliberative” hearer is a judge of things to come. Aristotle goes on to give each of the three types a distinctive mode: deliberative oratory is either hortatory or dissuasive. Forensic oratory is either accusatory or defensive. Epideictic oratory offers either praise or blame (1358b8–13). In line with the remarks on “judgment” the three types also treat different aspects of time (1358b14–19). But when it comes to epideictic oratory, Aristotle’s penchant for tidiness comes under strain: while he deals primarily with matters of the present, the display orator might also recall past events or anticipate the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".