The practice of arguing on both sides of any question was essential to early modern rhetorical education, to Renaissance drama, and especially to Shakespeare's Othello. This essay explores two different conceptions of rhetoric and rhetorical ability in Othello. Although Othello understands the ornaments of rhetoric, he has not, like Iago, mastered its habits of mind, particularly the cultivation of ambiguity required by rhetorical study. The difference between Othello's and Iago's rhetorical worldviews is exemplified by their differing abilities in arguing both sides of a question. This practice, which requires holding two contradictory arguments in mind, is one of Iago's main strengths. Since they are Othello's primary weaknesses, Iago's skepticism and ability to argue from multiple perspectives ultimately prove to be Othello's undoing. But these same abilities and habits of mind are also the only means by which Othello may have been able to refute Iago's rhetoric and prevent his own destruction. In Othello Shakespeare argues both sides of the question about arguing both sides of the question, outlining both the advantages and disadvantages of this essential rhetorical practice and the worldview it encourages. [E.P.D]
