Enthymemes are primarly based on the grounds of probability, whereas syllogisms are always based on the certainty and necessity of a set of premises. There is much confusion in distinguishing between the two because often times, enthymemes also start with certain and necessary propostitions and end with an obviously necessary conclusion. As citied by Bitzer, McBurney states that ". . . an enthymeme is a syllogism starting from probabilities or signs".
Enthymemes were originally identified by a deficiency in their formally designed structure. The problem with their structure is related to scientific demonstration. Anything that is considered dialectic or rhetoric deals with the contingency in probabilities, and not with some analytical proof required from establishing a scientific demonstration. Most scientifically-based demonstrations must begin with a universal and necessary premises. On the contrary, enthymemes completely defile this ideal because they are based on a certain set of infallible signs with premises that are inevitable and invariable. This makes it evident that since enthymemes are a result of probabilities that are mostly true, they cannot be easily separated from syllogisms. The inconsistancy in the core of what an enthymeme is makes it difficult to categorize its structure or function.niversal and necessary premises, in order to find a logical conclusion.only or easily proven by a simple demonstration
The core of an enthymeme is believed to be concrete in nature, whereas a syllogism is considered to be abstract. The concrete nature of the enthymeme is centered around its continuity of having premises and conclusion that must rely on come level of dedication or action by an individual. The concreteness of the concepts of honesty and knowledge can be found in the premises and conclusion of dialectical syllogisms, as well as enthymemes. The confusion that exists is due to the fact that enthymemes can be abstract and syllogisms can be concrete depending on the subject matter involved.hat must rely on come level of standard devotion on the subject matter involved, and how commited an individual is to discovering the truth.
All of these identifications essentially prove that an enthymeme is based on the probabilities of its premises, which are invariable and mostly true. The definition of enthymemes are those also found to be similar to syllogisms through signs and demonstrations. Their concreteness alone does not make them distinguishable either because it is not a consistant factor of recognition.
The mark of distinction between an enthymeme, or a rhetorical syllogism, and a demonstrative or dialectical syllogism is in their unique sense of purpose. The former focuses on the nature of persuasion, and the latter two focus on establishing a scientifically-drawn conclusion and a line of criticism. The demonstrative premises are asserted without reference to the opponent in the argument and msut be truthfully attained. The dialectician are asks for his identifiable and obvious premises to be given a choice between different viewpoints. The ideal of the enthymeme or rhetorical syllogism, similar to the dialectic syllogism, is to ask for its premises, thereby giving equal notions of understanding the argument and having the means to successfully persuade at its end.
The main purpose of the enthymeme is persuasion through a type of rhetorical discourse, where the audience knows the premises to assist in formulating the conclusion. It has been stated by E.M. Cope that "[T]he syllogism is complete in all its parts; the enthymeme imcomplete; one of the premises or the the conclusion is invariably wanting". By its very essence, an enthymeme possesses either suppressed premises or a suppressed conclusion, both of which are completed through the rhetorical process of audience and speaker interaction. In this, the audience is forced ot use its own wealth of knowledge and experience to supply any missing information. The premises of any enthymeme is given by the audience from the speaker's inititiation, and therefore complete proofs for an argument are developed. Unlike the dialectic syllogism, where criticism is the primary focus, and questions and answers must be given for analysis, the enthymeme replaces that form of rhetoric to achieve a better sense of rapport and continuity between the audience and the speaker.en the audience and the speaker by establishing the audience's responsibility to self-persuade.
In essence, Bitzer has shown that Aristotle's enthymeme is pertinent and useful because of the way be which in constructed. It fosters a well-balanced manner of construction as "a syllogism based on probabilities, signs, and examples, whose function is rhetorical persuasion". Its essential sense of character relies on its combined efforts of speaker and audience to achieve a desired effect.
Kara Grimme, klg8516@uncwil.edu