Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Knowledge vs Understanding

           The comparison of Cicero’s De Inventione and De Oratore really struck home with me in something that has been on my mind quite a bit recently. This time of the year here at BYU is the time where a lot of companies are recruiting for internships in my field, and I hear so many of my fellow students say that they “know” they want to pursue a certain type of work in my field. In asking these fellow students of mine why they feel so strongly about a certain discipline of our future field they rarely respond with a sensible or logical answer, to provide any reason to their decision. I see this concept mirrored in Cicero’s writing, as it is an easy comparison to make because Cicero wrote De Inventione as a “graduating” student himself.



           In De Inventione Cicero expresses much of what any student would express if asked about their studies: basically a recitation of their text books, and the knowledge of what was originally learned by professionals in that subject. Cicero more or less repeats what we learn from Aristotle’s systemization of rhetoric with some of his own thoughts and take always, which does show that he truly understands the material. However, just because we understand something doesn’t mean that we may be necessarily good at it or like the material we know so well. At this point, Oratory has yet to be proven in Cicero’s own life. This is where De Oratre comes in.


Has Cicero changed or developed his ideas after 30 years of legal & political experience? De Oratre shows that the answer to this question is that Cicero has applied his knowledge and developed not only a reinforced knowledge of oratory through experience, but his own conclusions about oratory in practice. “Yet no discipline yields greater rewards or has done more for civilization than oratory” is one of the many clear statements that Cicero makes that shows he now understands rhetoric at a level in which he is able to teach rhetorical theory of his own. De Oratre is evidence that even Cicero, a genius in the art of rhetoric, needed experience applying his knowledge in order to come to a full understanding of it.

3 comments:

  1. I agree with you that Cicero has developed his own conclusions about oratory in the intervening years between the works. I do however think that he had already begun to prove himself by the time De Inventione came out. That work is well done, and applies some of the rhetorical tools that he talks about in it. For example, his arrangement. Though he is a better orator in De Oratore, he was quite the orator to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is interesting how we can "know" something in our minds, but to actually experience it, love it, and make it a part of who we are is an absolutely different kind of knowledge. Our choice define us and it is interesting to see how Cicero changed from being a part of his learning (a student) to his learning being a part of him (master)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Your post reminded me of a quote found in Preach My Gospel. It reads, "it is true intelligence for a man to take a subject that is mysterious and great in itself, and to unfold and simplify it so that a child can understand it." This statement holds true in this case as well. We are able to see the understanding that Cicero has attained with time. He is able to manipulate the ideas to explain them in very simple and clear ways.

    ReplyDelete