Vocation – καλέω and the Vo-Tech School

Oratory as form of vocation discussed by Crassus, in Cicero’s On Oratory and Orators, is defined as a calling – a profession an individual embodies. καλέω or kaleo is roughly translated to English as “to call” or “a calling.” [1] The path in which these two vastly different words are linked appears disconnected, through multiple languages and roots, they meet up. Vocation, from Latin vocatio means "a calling," from "vocatus” – with a base of “vocare”, meaning "to call." The original Proto-Indo-European root, wekw, turns up in Latin vox, meaning "voice.” In Greek, this root was reshaped into the word “epos”, which is broken down into “epic” and “ops”, meaning voice. The root ops can be found in "calliope" from the Greek word kalliope, meaning "beautiful voiced" and combines kalos "beautiful" and ops "voice." Kalo or καλῶ is derived from kaleo. [2]

A more modern definition for vocation is “an occupation to which a person is specially drawn or for which they are suited, trained or qualified.”[3] This modern definition is a far cry for the original meaning in which individuals were summoned to an arguably honorable and influential career choice or lifestyle. Today's word simply conjures up thoughts of an alternative to a traditional four-year college. This shift in definition stemmed from the increase in vocational colleges over the past century across the states. From 1917 to 1998 thousands of Vocational-Technical Schools have been established in communities throughout the United States through three phases through the Smith-

Hughes Act, School-to-Work Opportunities Act, and the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Act [4] The U.S. Department of Education reports: “Virtually every high school student takes at least one vocational education course, and one in four students take three or more courses in a single program area. One-third of college students are involved in vocational programs, and as many as 40 million adults engage in short-term post-secondary occupational training.” [5] But this isn’t just an American concept. Currently, in Greece, I.E.K.’s – or Ινστιτούτο Επαγγελματικής Κατάρτισης – consist of public ad private vocational training in 14 different sectors, including telecommunications, tourism-transport, food and drink industry, clothing-footwear, applied arts, etc.[6]

In On Oratory and Orators, Crassus accuses Antonius of “making our orator a mere mechanic,” by simplifying the process. After comparing orators, clergy and soldiers to mechanics and others we would lump into the modern definition of vocation, it is clear the term has been watered down significantly to apply to almost all careers, not just those that really define the individual through their responsibility to society.

[1] http://www.myetymology.com/

[2] http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ecclesiology

[3] https://www.msu.edu/~defores1/gre/roots/gre_rts_afx2.htm

[4] http://www.ed.gov/offices/OUS/PES/NAVE/exec_sum.pdf

[5] http://www.ed.gov/offices/OVAE/CTE/index.html

[6] http://www.oeek.gr/html/CG-sectors.asp

The School of Leisure

Word Count: 471

A term that nearly every individual uses on a day-to-day basis, and yet rarely, if ever, thinks about the meaning of the term is ‘school.’ Our contemporary minds immediately picture educational institutions in which students congregate to learn the information that need to know to succeed in the world. The concept of grouping students together in a centralized location for learning has existed since Classical antiquity; however, it was for a very different reason.

An interesting revelation is brought to the surface when one excavates the origination of the word ‘school,’ and perhaps it is one that ought to be further investigated in the United States in the light of the brokenness of our education system. ‘School’ comes from the ancient Greek word schole [1] meaning simply ‘leisure.’ Leisure was the cultural ideal, “the only life fit for a Greek” [2]. According to Aristotle the “good life,” which all free men should lead, occurred only during leisure. Leisure in Greek society was elitist, privy to the select few who spent their lives in education, cultural pursuits, and contemplation. Contemplation was believed to raise one to a higher intellectual plane of existence. Thus, leisure meant for the Greeks, the freedom to pursue knowledge.

So, although schole can be literally translated as leisure, the meaning differs from how we think of leisure today. In our modern society, leisure is the time in which we can sit an twiddle our thumbs; in the time of Plato and Aristotle, leisure was the time you set aside from your daily routine. However, the time was spent learning, discussing, and contemplating, rather than idleness. Aristotle wrote “we work in order to be at leisure” [3]. Once at leisure, individuals must try to learning what is valuable to know. And thus, formal schools were established to allow citizens (or at least those that could afford it) the opportunity for leisure time, time to devote oneself to education. Schole came to mean “the search for the wisdom of life” [4]; therefore fulfilling one’s obligation to the good life.

If school in Ancient Greece led individuals to Aristotle’s ideal of the good life, perhaps we ought determine what happened along the time-line of the formalized educational institution, because we have certainly come a long ways from the initial purpose of school. Many argue that our contemporary education system teaches students what to think rather than how to think. Maybe it’s time to take a note from the Greeks.

“The first principle of all action is leisure. Both are required, but leisure is better than occupation and is its end” [5].

[1] T. F. HOAD. "school." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. 1996. Encyclopedia.com. 25 Nov. 2009
[2] deGrazia, S. (1962). Of time, work, and leisure. Garden City, New York: Anchor books.
[3] Aristotle (1921). Politics. In The Works of Aristotle. Tr. B. Jowett. (Ed.) W. D. Ross.
London, England: Oxford University Press.
[4] Goodale, T. & Godbey, G. (1988). The evolution of leisure. State College, PA: Venture Press.
[5] Aristotle.

Taxis is key

Plato discusses the use of form in Phaedrus pointing out each part of the form must play a specific function. He uses the analogy of the soul and the charioteer to show how each plays a specific function and role.[1] Isocrates' criticism of the sophists was there was no teaching of the art, but rather teaching students to mimic without truly understanding how to arrange a speech or the function or rhetoric.[2] Aristotle offers a systematic way of understanding and creating rhetoric discussing the importance of arrangement or taxis in Book 3 of On Rhetoric.[3] Aristotle offered 5 major canons of rhetoric, which are still studied today in which taxis plays a major role in creating effective rhetoric. Cicero continues to emphasize the importance of the five canons and the role arrangement plays in rhetoric for the Romans. When he discusses the form of epideictic speaking, Cicero points out "figures of diction that reveal much labor, are more suitable for a speech of entertainment."[4] Arrangement and taxis becomes important in rhetoric for the arrangement ends up setting up the tone or purpose of the speech, which is important to consider depending on the speaking or rhetorical situation. Although, Only three of the canons were taught during Medieval times and arrangement was dropped, arrangement remains to be a heavy influence in both oral and written communication through the modern era.[5] In contemporary political rhetoric, there are some such as the inauguration in which there are set arrangements that the politician must follow whereas others are more epideictic in nature and arrangements although not as binding, still play an important role. After the attacks of 9/11 President Bush gave numerous speeches in attempt to comfort and rally the citizens; however, to many his speeches seemed undisciplined. It was only after Bush, his advisors, and speechwriters took the time to seriously think and plan out the arrangement and style of the speech he would present to Congress. The considered the arrangement carefully struggling to find the right place and time to put in the call to action, establishing a background and introduction, and carefully considering how the speech would end. The speech was so successful that he was interrupted by congress applause 31 times.[6] Bush's consideration of arrangement along with its relationship with the other canons resulting in the overwhelming acceptance and success of his address shows the importance arrangement plays in contemporary times.

Word Count = 494

---

[1] Plato, Phaedrus, trans. W.C. Helmbold and W.G. Rabinowitz (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1956), 28 (246).

[2] Isocrates, Against the Sophists, trans. David C. Mirhady and Yun Lee Too (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2000), 63.

[3] Aristotle, On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse, trans. George A. Kennedy (New York: Oxford University Press), 230 (1414b).

[4] J. Richard Case, "The Classical Conception of Epidecitic," The Quarterly Journal of Speech (1961): 293-300.

[5] Herbert W. Hildebrandt, "Some Influences of Greek and Roman Rhetoric on Early Letter Writing," The Journal of Business Communication 25, no. 3 (1988): 7-27.

[6] D.T. Max, "The Making of the Speech: The 2,988 Words that Changed a Presidency," The New York Times Magazine, October 2007, 32-37.

The Association of Persuasion and Virtue

Word Count: 495

Phronesis (φρόνησις) is introduced by Aristotle in book II of The Rhetoric as one of the three things that gain the audience’s trust in a speaker and is translated from Greek into “practical wisdom” [1]. Aristotle discusses phronesis as one of two types of wisdom (the other being Sophia) and explains its relation to virtue in his writing: “Practical wisdom then, must be a reasoned and trued state of capacity to act with regard to human goods” [2]. Plato, in The Republic goes so far as to list phronesis (as prudence) to be one of the four cardinal virtues [3]. A speaker then, who acts and presents their argument in regards for the general good, is acting with phronesis—they take the persuasive techniques as discussed by Aristotle that are necessary to make an affective claim, while taking into consideration that whatever it is they are supporting is prudent.

Phronesis is concerned with the particularities of a situation in deliberating the necessary outcome. The morality of the situation is determined then primarily on the basis of the location, context, and surrounding events. One example of this at work in rhetoric is Isocrates’ Helen, wherein Isocrates analyzes Paris’ choice of Helen out of all the gifts he was offered; suggesting that while the gifts were discussed in terms of universal ideas, in the case of Helen, beauty, it was ultimately the particularizes (Helen’s connection to Zeus) wherein the deliberator (Paris) reached his conclusion [4]. Aristotle’s Rhetoric suggests that the rhetor whom utilizes phronesis in their deliberative actions is someone who analyzes that particular situation in relation to the whole, and the benefits (virtue) that could result from that situation.

The deliberative nature connected with phronesis inherently links the concept to politics; wherein throughout history, and in the status quo, we can point to any action by a leader and establish whether or not that individual acted with prudence/practical wisdom.

Within the field of rhetoric Phronesis has, in recent years, regained its primacy as inextricably linked to the rhetor and their actions not only in a political (deliberative) context but also for any individual in a role of power. Holt (2006) writes that: “By persuading people of the necessity of a specific strategy managers can enlist resources through the identification of mutual satisfaction, typically expressed as a blend of power and external benefits” [5]. In this sense, the absence of phronesis is being discussed—just as politicians who speak persuasively on a given subject that may not be virtuous, so do managers engage in this empty rhetoric that masks the true intentions and benefits (or drawbacks) of accepting what the rhetor says to be true. Now, more than ever, we find ourselves wary of the rhetor with false intentions, absent of virtue, and tricking us into believing that they are acting in the best interest of society. Phronesis remains the ideal: ways to measure the rhetoric used and decide if we trust that which is before us.

______________________________________________

Sources

1. The Rhetoric of Aristotle. Trans. Lane Cooper. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall International, 1932. Print.

2. Self, L. (1979). Rhetoric and Phronesis: The Aristotelian Ideal. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 12(2), 130-145. Retrieved from Communication & Mass Media Complete database.

3. The Republic. Tran. Desmond Lee. New York, New York: Penguin Group, 1955. Print.

4. Schwarze, S. (1999). Performing Phronesis: The Case of Isocrates' Helen. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 32(1), 78-95. Retrieved from Communication & Mass Media Complete database.

5. Holt, R. (2006). Principals and practice: Rhetoric and the moral character of managers. Human Relations, 59(12), 1659-1680. Retrieved from Communication & Mass Media Complete database.

hypokrisis

Book 3 of Aristotle’s On Rhetoric begins his discussion of the both the overall importance of delivery and its individual elements. The word that Aristotle uses for delivery is hypokrisis, which in ancient Greek meant “acting.”[1] Modern usage of the word is also decidedly not about delivery, either, since hypocrites are people whose actions don’t match up with their words. Given this interesting confluence of meaning and the fact that delivery is one of the marginalized canons of rhetoric, it is only right that the term Aristotle uses be examined with greater precision.

Book 3, chapter 1 of On Rhetoric begins with Aristotle explaining that whereas the previous books have described the types of proofs and the composition used in creating speeches, he is now turning to elements of delivery. He uses the term hypokrisis in a paragraph describing the similarities between poetry, theater, politics, and rhetoric. Aristotle ends with a curious move that simultaneously recognizes the power of delivery while at the same time marginalizing it as being part of a “sad state of governments.”[2] In Kennedy’s translation this passage is footnoted with a comment that Aristotle is repeating a common Platonic critique of oratory in the democracy in Athens, calling it a form a flattery. Further on Aristotle seems to reluctantly accept the necessity of teaching hypokrisis has a “small, but necessary place.”

Perhaps it is not a coincidence, then, that hypokrisis took on a meaning that has pejorative undertones. After all, delivery (along with memory) is one of the least-cherished of the five canons of traditional rhetoric, having frequently been omitted from textbooks on speech[3] (including our own public speaking texts, where discussion of delivery is banished to the appendices.) Lynee Louis Gaillet makes this very argument, stating that “the terminology of ancient rhetoric as it has developed over the centuries is mute testimony to its scorned state. The Greek word for the fifth office of rhetoric hypokrisis is the root of the modern word hypocrisy and the term rhetoric to a layperson means empty and insincere speech.”[4]

Despite its traditional marginalization, modern rhetorical scholars are now starting to pay more attention to hypokrisis. Jodi Enders discusses the way that rhetoric intersects with acting, writing that “since delivery supplies considerable information about the nature, circumstances, and material trappings of histrionic performance, it is in the performative context that the similarities of rhetoric and drama may be most fully understood.”[5] The emergence of new technology-driven content delivery has intrigued many rhetorical scholars, prompting them to revisit the question of delivery while simultaneously critiquing the shrinking of the canon down to arrangement and style.[6] As technologies like web 2.0 mature it is likely that more and more attention will be paid to hypokrisis, whether Aristotle likes it or not.

---

[1] http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=hypocrisy

[2] Aristotle. On Rhetoric. Trans. George A. Kennedy. New York: Oxford UP, 1991.Page 218

[3] http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Canons/Delivery.htm

[4] Lewis Gaillet, Lynee. Scottish Rhetoric and its Influences. Routledge, 1998. Page 2

[5] Enders, Jodi. Landmark Essays on Rhetoric and Literature. Ed. Craig Kallendorf. Hermagoras, 1999.Page 66

[6] Re-situating and re-mediating the canons: A cultural-historical remapping of rhetorical activity, http://www.technorhetoric.net/11.3/topoi/prior-et-al/core/core.pdf

The dynamic vóµos

The most extensive depiction of nomos during our discussions of Classical rhetoric seems to have been spurred by the Jarratt text, which argued the term held a space in between the concepts of mythos and logos.[1] Without disregarding Jarratt’s contributions, we may broaden our understanding of nomos and its function within contemporary rhetorical applications. The Greek noun vóµos, indicating “usage, custom, law, melody, composition,”[2] is derived from the verb véµew, which is translated, “to deal, distribute, hold, manage.”[3] Classic writers reveal an awareness of social nomos, the laws and customs managing the polis, as a key aspect of that which constitutes a good rhetor.

Aristotle argues, in On Rhetoric, “The greatest and most important of all things in an ability to persuade and give good advice is to grasp an understanding of all forms of constitution and to distinguish the customs and legal usages and advantages of each.”[4] In his description of an aristocracy, Aristotle asserts the ruling aristocrats are educated specifically in nomos, that which lies “within the legal traditions [of the city];”[5] the end result of which is the maintenance of those learned traditions.[6] Knowledge of societal laws and customs of a place, allows the rhetor functionality within this public sphere to persuade. The rhetor’s requisite understanding of nomos is further established in De Oratore, through Cicero’s characterization of the rhetorical undertaking, “the whole art of speaking lies before us, and is concerned with common usage and the custom and language of all men.”[7] For Cicero, having learned the nomos surrounding any body or public to which one might speak is necessary before one may apply such knowledge during the process of invention, in order to speak as aptly as possible.

Beyond conceptualizing the noun nomos as the civic customs of a given place, the term is further appropriated to connote action. The Greek verb form previously identified, reveals a distinct, Germanic connection to modern usage. The infinitive nehmen (the past participle of which is genommen) is directly translated: to take;[8] an emergent colloquialism, wie man’s nimmt (literally, how one took), can be translated, “depending on your point of view.”[9] This German evolution from the original Greek suggests a process of active interpretation of social cues responsible for forming nomos,[10] or, as Jarratt might characterize it, a civic, “rhetorical consciousness.”[11] From classic to contemporary rhetorical applications of nomos, we find need to understand the construction of societal values and practices if our rhetoric is to be impactful.

With an understanding of nomos, as Jarratt relays, feminists can begin to open spaces of difference within texts, rewriting classical histories.[12] However, such reconceptualizations of the past may not serve modern feminist practicalities. Instead, perhaps, historical constructions of nomos can be a reflective tool, looking toward current hegemonic realities, to better comprehend their constructive path. The challenge then, is revealed through civic engagement in current happenings which function to construct contemporary nomoi. By actively creating new spaces in the present, nomos may inform the modern feminist rhetor forward to productive aims.[13]

---

[1] Jarratt, S. (1998). Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric Refigured. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

[2] “nomos”. (2008). Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Aristotle. (2007). On Rhetoric. Trans. George A. Kennedy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, I.6.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid, I.7.

[7] Cicero. (1970). On Oratory and Orators. Trans. or Ed. J. S. Watson. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, I.III.

[8] “nehmen”. (1987). Webster’s New World German Dictionary Concise Edition. Indianapolis, IN: William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Dean, M. (2006). A political mythology of world order: Carl Schmitt’s nomos. Theory, Culture & Society 23, 5, 1-22 finds further support for linking nomos to nehmen.

[11] Ibid, 35.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Word Count: 500

The Juror's Oath [Burden]

Aristotle wrote in On Rhetoric about the role of the juror. “We must argue that the juror's oath "I will give my verdict according to honest opinion" means that one will not simply follow the letter of the written law.” (1). He expanded upon this by telling the reader it is the duty of the juror to assess both the written law and the facts and opinions presented in a case.

The word “juror” is derived from the Latin word jurare, which literally means to swear. (2). Jurare can then be traced back to the more formal and simple form of “jus”, or “the law”. We can see that just through the transformation of the word, one who serves on a jury both formally and informally swears by the law.

Uses of juror can be traced back to ancient Greece, and its use has been seen numerous times already within this class. Some historians argue the reasoning behind selecting around 500 male citizens over the age of thirty to act as a jury was due to massive greed. If the jury was to be tampered with and bribed, it would be much harder if not impossible to bribe 500 separate men. (3)

Greek logographer put weighed his opinion of the function of juries in 395 BC in his work Against Alchibiades: “Now it is reasonable, gentlemen of the jury, that men who are now trying such a case for the first time since we settled the peace should act not merely as jurors, but in fact as law-makers. For you know well that your decision upon these cases will determine the attitude of the city towards them for all time.” (4)

When it comes to recent scholarship, some contemporary scholars have argued that juries are not capable of the duty they are assigned. Studies have examined how rhetoric, if used correctly, sways juries and makes them unpredictable when it comes to their duties to oversee a judicial trial. Furthermore, current juries are plagued with apathy, and the word “duty” attached to serving on a jury has become more of a burden than a service to the community. (5)

In fact, Elizabeth Britt examined and outlined a current movement to make a juror’s decision in a trial based more on probabilities and statistics. This movement is fueled by fears that rhetoric is clouding the contemporary courtroom and further affecting a juror’s ability to reasonably oversee the current laws and facts presented within a case.

Overall, I find it very interesting that a juror’s duty has morphed from a civic responsibility to an inconvenience. Perhaps further study or discussion can help answer the question of how and why this transformation occurred.

Works Cited

(1) Aristotle, On Rhetoric, Book I Chapter 15.

(2) “Jury”, Online Dictionary Etymology http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?l=j&p=5

(3) “Criminal Procedure in Ancient Greece and the Trial of Socrates”, http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/socrates/greekcrimpro.html

(4) Lysias, Against Alchibiades 1, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0154:speech=14:section=4&highlight=juror

(5) McCaster, A., “CSI Affect: Yet Another Excuse for Juror Apathy?” National Law Journal, 2005.

Eloquence

Eloquence

“…but that no one could be an orator but a man of true wisdom; and that eloquence itself, as is consisted in the art of speaking well, was a kind of virtue, and that he who possessed one virtue possessed all, and that virtues were in themselves equal and alike; and thus he who was eloquent possessed all virtues, and was a man of true wisdom”(Cicero 26-27). There are numerous times that Cicero marries oratory with eloquence. In fact, it is referenced over 900 times by Cicero in On Oratory and Quintilian in Institutio Oratoria, Book 2. In the quote above eloquence is considered not only a virtue but one that encapsulated all other virtues. Any man that possessed all these virtues was considered a wise man.

Eloquence originates from the Latin word eloquentia, which can loosely be traced back to a few Greek words that refer to the Muses or persuasion. The roots of the word come from the verb loqui, which means “to speak”. The “e” attached to the front is a shorted form of the preposition “ex” meaning “out of”. Eloquence, therefore, is the “action, practice, or art of expressing thought with fluency, force, and appropriateness, so as to appeal to the reason or move the feelings.” Eloquence has also been coupled with writing. Cicero discusses eloquence in writing stating that… “nor will any man ever attain them (meaning qualities of applause) unless after long and great practice in writing…” (43). The OED asserts that eloquence is “primarily of oral utterance, and hence applied to writing that has the characteristics of good oratory.”

David Hume, an 18th Century Scottish philosopher, developed a list of discourses that would be considered eloquent. The art included sermons, essays, argumentative discourse, and poetry, along with a few other categories. In essence, eloquence has not changed much from Cicero’s time or since Hume’s developed his categories. In our society individuals who are considered eloquent include politicians, lawyers and many other public figures. Eloquence has never been more central than in our society where technology allows us instantaneous access to speakers as well as the ability to review them multiple times. It is no wonder that writing continues to be a tool for developing eloquence in speaking. Public figures utilize the services of speech writers to assist them in developing their eloquence. There is one aspect of Cicero’s descriptions of eloquence that I am uncomfortable in applying to today’s society. That is that individuals who are eloquent possess true wisdom. I would agree that they possess a certain type of wisdom, in that they know how to use words to persuade the emotions of their listeners, and that they have a particular amount of knowledge on certain subjects. However, this does not mean that their judgment is always sound. Yes, it is ideal and that is what Cicero was striving for. Unfortunately, this was not the case in Cicero’s time and is not the case in our time either.

Word Count: 496

Citations:
Online Etymology Dictionary
On Oratory and Orators
Oxford English Dictionary
Persius
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

“The purpose of all wars...is peace.” The Pāx Romana—The War on Terror

Word Count = 482

St. Augustine once said “The purpose of all wars...is peace[1].” As wars, military campaigns and devastating genocide has existed throughout mankind, these words have a special significance. This excavation will seek to unravel the concept of “peace” and interpret how peace influenced Roman society and its use in contemporary rhetorical framework.

Peace in the Latin translation is pāx, and pronounced “paːks.” It is defined as “freedom from civil disorder or the absence of war[2].” Peace in Roman antiquity was such a major and interwoven concept that it would be recognized under the rule of Augustus[3] as the Roman pagan goddess known as Pax. Her opposite was Polemos (War).

Despite today’s definition of peace, the Romans regarded peace not as an absence of war, but the rare situation that existed when all opponents had been defeated beyond control[4]. However, this concept would develop into a lasting 200 year empire, formally known as the Pāx Romana (The Peace of Rome). Many emperors would issue Pāx coins, as if this would proclaim prosperity and could effectively overcome the realities of Roman hardship [5]. Amid this political propaganda, Jesus would be executed as Pilate would uphold the Pāx Romana at any cost, even sentencing a man to death with no justification[6].

Peace and its rhetorical influences would soon leak into the cornerstone of the Christian religion by the “Father of Western theology,” St. Augustine. St. Augustine created the—what may have been shaped by the present contextual climate—Just War theory. The criteria of a Just war was 1) war must occur for a good and just purpose rather than for self-gain or an exercise of power. 2) Just war must be waged by a properly instituted authority such as the state. 3) Peace must be a central motive even in the midst of violence. St. Augustine would form himself as the first major person to promote this cause; however, he would not be the last[7].

Amid St. Augustine’s reasoning of a Just war, in the early months after Sept. 11, 2001, President Bush fought terrorism with guns blazing, starting with the Taliban in Afghanistan. However, what began as a sound motive for war soon became the two longest wars in American history. The basis of these wars—amid attacks—peace. In President Bush’s farewell speech, he reiterated that the wars were to bring democracy, freedom, and peace to those citizens in the Middle East when he said “…is based on the conviction that freedom is the universal gift of Almighty God and that liberty and justice light the path to peace[8].” In concern to St. Augustine’s criteria for a Just war, much debate has and will continue whether the wars were in fact Just. But there is no mistaking that our former Commander in Chief felt peace was a central element. In the end, again war does not lead to peace; especially in the Middle East.

---

[1] Lewis, Jone Johnson. For Wisdom Quotes: Quotations to inspire and challenge . January 2009. 23 November 2009 .

[2] Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com. January 2009. 24 November 2009 .

[3] UNRV: Roman History. UNRV:Roman History; List of the Roman Gods. 2003-2009. 24 November 2009 .

[4] Momigliano ("The Peace of the Ara Pacis," _Warburg and Courtlund Inst._ (1942), 228-32.)

[5] Stern, Gaius, Women, Children and Senators on the Ara Pacis Augustae, UC Berkeley diss. 2006

[6] Edwin Lint. “Who Killed Jesus Christ”. Lumber River Quartet, M.S.Productions. 2004

[7] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. "War." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2008)

[8] President George W. Bush. “Farewell address”. January 15th, 2009.

9 D.W. Robertson, Jr. Saint Augustine. “On Christian doctrine”. Macmillan/Library of Liberal Arts. 1958

10 Online Etymology. “Pax”. Logo Designl Dan McCormack. November 2001