How did Aristotle classify forensic, deliberative, and epideictic speaking?

In his work Rhetoric, Aristotle classified speaking into three distinct categories to distinguish rhetoric from philosophy and science. He viewed rhetoric as an "art of doing"—a power employed in specific types of discourse rather than a productive art of making.1

His classification is as follows:

• Forensic: Associated with legal settings, this type of speaking involves a pleader and an audience acting as judges of a controversy, typically concerning past actions.1
• Deliberative: This category focuses on political or social decision-making, where the speaker addresses an audience to influence future actions or policies.1
• Epideictic: Also known as ceremonial oratory, this type is designed for rhetorical effect. It is demonstrative and declamatory, aiming to praise or condemn an individual, state, or occasion.21

Aristotle’s division reflects his belief that rhetoric deals with "probable matters" where multiple perspectives exist, contrasting with the "demonstrable matters" of science and philosophy. By categorizing these modes of speech, he sought to provide a systematic framework for how verbal skills could assist truth in prevailing during public controversy.1