But it is said, further, that rhetoric, contrary to the custom of all
other arts, adopts vice, because it countenances falsehood and moves the
passions. Neither of these are bad practises, and consequently not
vicious, when grounded on substantial reasons. To disguise truth is
sometimes allowable even in the sage, and if a judge can not be brought
to do justice except by means of the passions, the orator must
necessarily have recourse to them. Very often the judges appointed to
decide are ignorant, and there is necessity for changing their wrongly
conceived opinions, to keep them from error. Should there be a bench, a
tribunal, an assembly of wise and learned judges whose hearts are
inaccessible to hatred, envy, hope, fear, prejudice, and the impositions
of false witnesses, there would be little occasion for the exertions of
eloquence and all that might seem requisite would be only to amuse the
ear with the harmony of cadence. But if the orator has to deal with
light, inconstant, prejudiced, and corrupt judges, and if many
embarrassments must be removed in order to throw light upon truth, then
artful stratagem must fight the battle, and set all its engines to work,
for he who is beaten out of the straight road can not get into it again
except by another turnabout.


ELOQUENCE ACQUIRED BY STUDY AND PRACTISE

These are the principal objections which have been made against
rhetoric. There are others of less moment but derived from the same
source. That rhetoric is an art is thus briefly demonstrated. If art, as
Cleanthes thinks, is a power which prepares a way and establishes an
order, can it be doubted that we must keep to a certain way and a
certain order for speaking well? And if, according to the most generally