Jesyca Rodenberg
Excavation of Natural
The mysteries are daunting surrounding the word natural as utilized by Isocrates within the context of a student’s “natural ability.” A singular usage of the phrase is isolated from the many to focus our study of Isocrates’ intent. From Antidosis, 188, his thesis on the concept; “Both teachers and students have their own parts to play: in particular, the pupil’s requisite natural ability…”
The word as a whole is complex, expressed by two core nouns and an adjective. That adjective has upwards of three dozen singular definitions. That myriad of meaning could be attributed to the winding road the word took. Stemming originally from the Latin: naturalis, translated now to mean “by birth, according to nature.” The first direction it went was to Old French on to Scotts. Natural there meant to lack refinement or talent, or to be a bastard. The other to the Greek, where the language, according to Perseus, accepted over 100 versions of the word, with meanings along a continuum from an in-born trait, to being deprived of affection, to being a psychic.
The key adjective definition found that best seemed to embrace the spirit of Isocrates’ work led to έμφυτος, the Greek for “born in a person.” However, a review of the original Greek reveals Isocrates’ use of the word phusis, which in isolation means “content of character, constitution.” This would seem to be much closer to the Greek for the noun natural, physis, which would lead this author to believe the meaning is more connected to the negative derivations of the word, including blank and talentless. 1
In 2000, Haskins made the link between poetics and rhetoric via Isocrates, saying, “Isocrates’ performative concetion of speech education, according to which identification and performance both activate and sustain one’s civic identity.”
This can be linked to our original interpretations of the translation of natural to claim that Isocrates proffered you had to be born to receive the education that would link to your civic duty. This logic would support the claim that Isocrates promoted an oligarchy. However, our field would be changed if the meaning of phusis was reexamined and found to be a derogatory descriptor. If an individual with this “talent” was in fact, talentless, we would find a whole new reason behind why his teachings were to be applied to epideictic speech only. 2
Author’s Notes
1. As far as my understanding of etymology takes me, when the definitions of natural comes from nature, it seems to take on a vent of untreated and untouched by man and hence uneducated. When the definitions come from birth, there they take on the vein of the talented and/or soulful.
2. To be frank with the reader, the original thesis and direction of this work was to highlight the ironic movements promoting the need for “natural talent” in the courtroom, especially on the witness stand. However, the surprising discovery of the rogue Greek word and the exploration of its intent left no words for this application.
2 comments:
Do we seek to create an oligarchy from our academic system. We have college, grad school, then go on for doctorate. Each level showing a different amounnt of importance and responsibilities. Have we really pushed away from an oligarchy or are we closer to Isocrates's ideas than we realize?
Jesyca, I was wondering if you found anything about what makes something natural: the earth or the gods. I think nature is often considered today as something "god-given," and I was not sure whether the information you found distinguished nature as something inherently tied to religious/spiritual beliefs.
Additionally, while I understand that natural is not exactly a rhetorical term, I think it is important to examine the rhetoric of "natural" in many different realms. The word is thrown around so often as a selling point, as a motivator for purchase or participation, in industries such as food and medicine. A quick search will reveal how often the of this word is considered in rhetorical studies today.
Post a Comment