Foreword: A Long and Proud Tradition

Abstract

This introduction to following collection of essays about AFA's fifty-year history is merely to remind us of a few points: Forensics has a long history which predates AFA; forensic activities and terminology have changed as cultures, philosophies, and educational practices have changed; future changes are inevitable; and despite changes, we have a proud tradition. These points are so obvious that they are easily overlooked, especially since studies in rhetorical history tend to focus on theory rather than on speaking exercises. In this sketch of our pre-AFA tradition, theory will receive only incidental mention and forensic activities will be emphasized. EARLY EUROPEAN TRADITIONS The precise origins of our forensic traditions are lost in mists of history, not only because historical data are in short supply, but also because of changing definitions. The word forensic originally had restricted meaning of legal oratory rather than broad range of speech exercises with which today's AFA members are familiar. However, we know that what we call forensic activities date back at least to fifth century BCE, when sophists (a word that originally meant but later was used pejoratively) devised speaking exercises for their students. One of earliest exercises was called dialegesthai. Although word was sometimes used to label informal speech (like our word conversation), it was also used to designate a definable, rule governed event in which participants (as in modern group discussion) would discuss aspects of a topic or issue for purpose of coming to a mutual agreement or (Timmerman, 1993, p. 120). The types of questions varied. Some were philosophically abstract while others were practical political issues. As time went by, teachers initiated various spin-offs of dialegesthai. Formats, educational goals, and theoretical underpinnings differed, but despite differences, these exercises were what today we call forensic activities. Protagoras (c. 485-4 15 BCE), often called the father of debate, believed that absolute truth is unknowable. He developed theoretical concept of dissoi logoi: two opposing views have equal validity, one being that which is most persuasive. In keeping with his skepticism, he invented some debate exercises, exact formats of which are unknown. However, we know that students argued a thesis pro and con. Some theses were abstract philosophical ones, but his primary educational goal was not to train philosophers. It was to train students to deliver argumentative speeches in law courts and political assemblies--a skill that would later be called rhetoric (for details on origin of word rhetoric, see Schiappa, 1990). Socrates (469?-399 BCE), who converted dialegesthai into dialectic, had a passion for argumentation, but he stood in marked contrast to both Protagoras and earlier practitioners of dialegesthai. He had little use for popular opinion, whether it was opinions of juries or group discussants or political assemblies. Although he left no writings, he apparently taught that truth was absolute and knowable and that a clear distinction should be made between dialectic, question and answer method of obtaining one correct answer, and rhetoric, which does not seem interested in universal validity of answer but only in persuasiveness for moment (Kennedy, 1963, p. 14). His student, Plato (428-348 BCE), also believed that Absolute Truth could be discovered via dialectic. He composed his Dialogues in a question-answer format and used dialectic as a method of instruction in his school (the Academy). Question-answer formats were set up, not only between teacher and student, but also between students. The purpose was to bring students around to understanding Truth about some philosophical question and to develop skills necessary to defend Truth. …