當代審議民主理論在追溯思想源頭時，往往會提到最早的概念是 來自亞里斯多德。但是，審議民主理論家隨即指出亞里斯多德的「審 議修辭」模式並不符合今日民主政治的精神。然而，本文則認為亞氏 政治修辭觀並非與當代民主政治不相容，相反的，還可以提供借鏡與 啟發。本文從亞里斯多德當時論辯的脈絡以及與修辭術相關的學門： 辯證法、倫理學以及政治學等，對亞氏政治修辭觀進行扼要的介紹。 同時，也與審議民主理論的觀點進行異同比較。本文指出，因為審議 民主過於強調平等參與、理性對話等特質，在實踐上，幾乎僅能以 「小眾集會」的方式進行，與今日大眾民主反而有很大差距。而亞氏 提供的政治修辭模式，則是大眾民主中政治實然面的重要一環，不容 忽視。最後，本文提出五點亞氏政治修辭觀對於當代的啟發，包括： 政治修辭作為公民教育的一環；認真對待政治人物的言論；人格、論 理邏輯與情戚並重的說服、不要高估公民的理解能力以及認真看待修 辭就是尊重民眾的判斷能力。

When contemporary political theorists trace the origin of deliberative democracy, they usually point to Aristotle. However, they also indicate immediately that Aristotle’s ideas of deliberative speech or rhetoric contradict today’s democracy. In this article, I contend that Aristotle’s Art of Rhetoric could work well in contemporary mass democracy, and offers some better and different views from deliberative democracy. My argument is structured as follows: First, I outline Aristotle’s art of rhetoric through the context of Plato’s and sophists’ contending understandings of rhetoric. Second, I focus on the relation between Aristotle’s Rhetoric and other related fields: Dialectics, Ethics, and Politics. At the same time, I try to compare and contrast Aristotle’s Rhetoric with deliberative democracy. Third, I offer two levels of responses to answer the question of whether rhetoric fits democracy. Finally, I conclude with five useful proposals which Aristotle’s rhetoric could offer to today’s democracy: (1) Make rhetoric part of civic education, (2) Take seriously what the politicians say, (3) Combine the power of ethos, logos, and pathos to persuade, (4) Do not expect too much of citizens’ understanding, and (5) Regard rhetoric highly, which means respecting the judgment of people.