Most rhetoricians agree that the ancient Greek orators from the Classical period (5.-4.cent.BCE) designate the beginning of the Western rhetorical tradition.However,here the agreement ends: Some scholars regard ancient Greece as the golden ageofrhetoric,whereas others warn not to (re-)write an idealistic history of rhetoric,concealing the merits of other periods and cultures.A critical examination of the rhetorical history consisting ofanalyses of the rhetorical texts fiom the different periods reveals an idealized notion of rhetoric in most writers.Even in periods where rhetoric was reduced to merely omament/elocutio,we observe an inherent idealism in these writers who believe in social and ethical value of rhetoric.Many have criticized rhetoric for being a potential means of manipulation and demagogy but most rhetoricians and rhetorical scholars believe in rhetorics educative force.However,what is the right perception of rhetoric? Does rhetoric per se include ethics?Isocrates was the first scholar to point out this fundamental dilemma of rhetoric as he dissociated himself from the sophists who used rhetoric as an instrmnent of persuasion regardless of truth or falseness.Isocrates,on the other hand,argued in favour of the"vir bonus"(in Ciceros Latin words),the idea of the natural union of communication and ethics.This may be regarded as one of the very first conception of how rhetoric requires and fosters ethics-a conception Aristotle later further developed.Even though this rhetorical dilemma is over 2.000 years old,it is still highly ongoing.On the basis of my experience as a speech writer for the government party at the national parliament of Denmark,Folketinget,in the period August 2011 to January 2012,I will introduce you to modem sophists anno 2012.In Denmark students of rhetoric often do field studies working as assistants of politicians or at various organizations and workplaces.I shall describe my work at the Danish parliament where I noticed that the well-known ancient rhetorical dilemma often reappears.The question,then,becomes: Is rhetoric basically more a question of persuasion than a question of ethics? My experiences have led me to the preliminary conclusion that academic rhetorical studies perhaps insist too much on rhetorics inherent ethics.This may be based on an idealistically conception of the rhetorical tradition which perhaps needs revision.I do not have a final solution to this perennial dilemma but I shall offer some reflections caused by my field work and what I have so far read of ancient and modem rhetorical theory.