From the book, “The Rhetoric of Aristotle”:

Now proof (persuasion) is a kind of demonstration; for we entertain the strongest conviction of a thing if we believe that it has been ‘demonstrated.’ Rhetorical proof, however, (is not scientific demonstration); it takes the form of an enthymeme, this being, in general, the most effective among the various forms of persuasion. The enthymeme, again, is a kind of syllogism (reasoning from the general to the specific, deduction); now every kind of syllogism falls within the province of Dialectic (showing the contradictions in an opponents argument and overcoming them), and must be examined under Dialectic as a whole, or under some branch of it. Consequently, the person with the clearest insight into the nature of syllogisms, who knows from what premises and in what modes they may be constructed, will also be the most expert in regard to enthymemes, once he has mastered their special province (of things contingent and uncertain such as human actions and their consequences), and has learned the differences between enthymemes and logical syllogisms. (The latter are complete, and yield an absolute demonstration.) Truth and likeness to truth are discerned by one and the same faculty; while human nature, let us add, has aptitude enough for discerning what is true, and men in most cases do arrive at the truth. Consequently, one who is skilled in discerning the truth can do well in weighing probabilities (matters of opinion).

That, my friends, is an ancient form of “fisking,” or whatever it is we want to call it in this phase of human evolution.