For this blog post, I want you to explore what rhetoric is--how it is defined and used; why it is important to know and understand; how it connects to writing; what it means to you in the class and perhaps in your major. Use the reading by Crowley and Hawhee to ground your post but also begin to synthesize (this means taking your thinking past a summary) to make connections to the class, to each other, and to yourself as a writer. You can also use this post to explore what rhetoric means today in our society--the ways in which people practice it (often without evening realizing it) and how it might be useful for you once you graduate.
Per normal: shoot for 250-500 words. Make specifics connections to the reading and to your peers.
Due: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 by class time.
Crowley and Hawhee pointed out something that I found very interesting: rhetoric is viewed in a negative light in modern discourse. Now that I stop to think about it, it's perfectly obvious. But it's not something I'd ever considered before. Why is it that we view persuasive speaking and writing as something almost insidious? We see it as something used by people to trick us into doing something we don't want to do, rather than them trying to explain a legitimate opinion.
ReplyDeleteOur class in themed around an education to argument. Therefore, disagreement is not something to be avoided, but more to be looked for. But how often in our general conversations is it possible to say that we tried to change the mind of someone we actively disagreed with? Generally speaking, we try to avoid these differences all together. The exception is in well regulated areas like political debates, where such disagreements are looked for. Unless the disagreement is minor, like what movie to watch, or where to eat dinner, it is rare that we use our rhetorical skills.
I find that as a writer, I often follow the same pattern in everything I write. I discuss the issue, but I rarely feel as though I actually contribute anything meaningful to discussion. Somehow, it always feels like the full issue evades my grasp, like what I'm saying is just a lot of bluster that doesn't really mean anything. I'm not sure whether this is a failure of reasoning, just my imagination, or something else entirely. But the end result is the same. I don't feel very persuasive, even to myself. I certainly don't know quite as much as I like to think I know.
In the end, the scripted arguments we tend to have feel pre-rehearsed. How often is it that we look at something, and realize that the "debate" is the same one we've been having for over thirty years? Save for a few political issues, we almost never seem to see any real progress. Politicians have given up persuading people, who are all segregated into their own little bubble of ideologically aimed media. And people aren't willing to be persuaded either. They'd rather hold onto their prior beliefs, and avoid making the effort required to change their minds.
Maybe Crowley and Hawhee are right. That we need to return to the Greek and Roman method of persuasion and rhetoric. But our beliefs in an evidence based scientific society is so far entrenched that it's hard to see us going back. People would rather live in an echo chamber than experience actual debate.
I definitely agree. It's weird that back then they viewed rhetoric as a productive argument where nowadays it is frowned upon to state your true opinion unless it is a small fact. There are so many controversial topics that aren't politically correct to discuss in public or with strangers; people would feel attacked rather than involved in an educated conversation.
DeleteFirst, Mazel tov on beating me as first post by one minute! I thought it was pretty cool we both posted at the same time. Second, I really enjoy your realization that persuasive speech is perceived as insidious. It really is the bane of some people's existence and they only want to be with people they agree with. Argument really is the best way to "contribute anything meaningful to discussion." I must disagree that we need to return to the Greek and Roman method of persuasion. Our culture is evolving and our manner of rhetoric should evolve with it. The fundamentals are the same, but there has been lots of good change along with the bad, just as there will be good and bad change in the future. In my opinion, we only look at the good examples of rhetoric in the past because of two reasons. First, hindsight is 20-20 and we worship the sage wisdom of the past. Second, I don't think historians wanted to record awful habits in the rhetoric world, it's plain politics. We view the past through the lens we're given by the history books.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI would have to admit that Greek and Roman societies were the closed to the "utopian," due to several reasons. First, the idea of their politics were involve only around they daily based. They didn't have the ability to access the diversity and more "problematics" that we get involved around. Therefore, they social norms and the politics are only account for certain areas. More importantly, the goals of their societies and politician were focused around the life quality and use rhetorical situation to make important decisions. Unlike the ancient time, money is the central of current world. The living quality and the care of other living organism become less important. However, one thing that both of the modern world and ancient world society have in common is that the power of the language, Rhetoric. We use the language to persuade others. I do like the fact that the author pointed out the power of the language that have been involve around our society since the ancient time.
DeleteJosh, I think your insight that history is typically viewed through a more positive lens than it deserves is very interesting. We do like to emphasize the rosier parts of history (particularly our own,) and gloss over our failures and foibles. I would like to clarify that I didn't intend to suggest that we return to the Greek and Roman system of rhetoric. My main point was that their view of it, that argument is a productive way to resolve disputes, has some merit to it. That is what I believe we should adopt. Next time, you'll have to beat to the punch in posting.
DeleteI totally agree when you talk about disagreement. We use to avoid disagreement in everyday life because it can be a source of conflict or uncomfortable situations. But considering the purpose of our class, think out of the box and find out arguments to disagree could be a good way to practice and improve our rhetorical skills.
DeleteRhetoric is common method for people to communicate their perceptions and opinions with each other. Rhetoric is essential to form communities and make decisions as a community; “people communicate their perceptions through language” (2); without it we would be individuals living in our own individual worlds. Even wild animals have rhetoric, no matter how simple it is. I remember, when I would watch the discovery channel, that lions roar at each other, almost like they’re saying, “Come here!” And they growl at each other, almost like they’re saying, “Go away!” Rhetoric relates to writing because it is a method of communicating knowledge to other people and of trying to convince them that your perception should be followed.
ReplyDeleteIn rhetoric, everything is an argument. The argument is useful because it contributes to the public discourse and therefore the public opinion. The ancient Rhetoricians believed that a person’s opinions were as viable as facts because their opinions were supposed to reflect the community from which they came. The same principle is true today, however opinion is off the table as viable because we are entering a type 1 world, a world where we control the planet and are one community, a world community. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdILmgJGuvw) Because we can now communicate across the world, we are all one people on planet earth and therefore should share the same opinion and should not value it as fact when arguing amongst ourselves. Unfortunately, modern rhetoric is completely different from ancient rhetoric. Today, we all take part in constructive arguments where “all parties to a rhetorical transaction must be willing to be persuaded by good arguments,” (5,6) but we also take part in deconstructive arguments where we shout and yell like monkeys; the monkey who shouts loudest and throws the biggest piece of poop wins! The O’Riley factor and Crossfire are prime examples of deconstructive rhetoric. Both parties are shouting without a care for their opponent’s arguments. A rhetorician must listen if he/she wants to be heard.
After I graduate I want to be a business man, a teacher, and a politician; rhetoric is extremely important to me. In order to be successful in all of my professions, I must be able to persuade and converse with good rhetoric. Especially as a politician, I will need to listen to others as well as my fellow politicians in order to do the bidding of those I’m representing and the whole American people. As a business man I will need to get customers and other firms. As a teacher I will need to persuade my students to listen, study, read, and basically do the things I’m asking. In general, my future depends on this skill. If my future were chocolate cake, I have the milk and I need just the right amount and kink of chocolate to make the chocolate milk taste good. Similarly, my future requires just the right amount and kind of rhetoric for me to be successful.
It sounds like you have a very cool, successful future ahead of you! I'm sure you'll master the skill of rhetoric in time for all of your professions. I liked your metaphor with chocolate cake and milk ha. It was funny and made sense.
DeleteThanks! I'm really craving chocolate milk right now. I'm going to buy some Nesquik!
DeleteWait same..
DeleteOhh, now I want Ovaltine.... and I really liked the monkey comparison. It is so true sometimes...
DeleteRhetoric is everywhere. It is in ads, the media, novels, and debates; if there is some form of persuasion or discussion of differences, there is rhetoric. Nowadays, being the sensitive society we are, we are convinced rhetoric is just politicians’ ways of tricking us into believing in something false. That is the wrong mindset. In ancient times, rhetoric was important in making decisions, resolving disputes regarding important issues, and distributing power. In the fifth century BCE, everybody had the right to speak in the Assembly, but still many did not. Only the rhetores spoke since they had an adequate education and understood the issues at hand. This is when the meaning of rhetor, “an expert on politics,” added “one skilled in public speaking, too.” Aristotle defined rhetoric as “power of finding the available arguments suited to a given situation.”
ReplyDeleteRhetoric has changed drastically over the years. Nowadays, rhetoricians embrace facts and testimony as concrete evidence to prove theories whereas ancient rhetoricians found opinions important. But what if that “evidence” is wrong? It can be opinionated without even knowing it. An example used was the taste of honey. What if to one person it tasted bitter and the other it tasted sweet? Both would use their opinion as fact unconsciously. Modern rhetoricians must use nonfactual arguments in order to persuade their audience.
It is important to understand rhetoric because it can help you a lot in writing. If you are able to get your point of view across in a paper without sounding cocky or demeaning, people will enjoy reading your piece and possibly change their opinion to match yours if it didn’t in the beginning.
It also helps you in arguments, which everybody experiences; they are indeed inevitable. For me, I am going to need rhetoric skills for my desired profession as a marine biologist or environmentalist. Most people agree that saving baby seals from oil spills or de-netting sea turtles from overabundant fishermen is fun and cute and nothing to really argue about, but the environment is a very controversial topic. So many pro-business people would say that as long they make a profit, the environment would be fine and come second to big bucks. Environmentalists would claim that our ecosystems are very delicate and will soon collapse unless we change our ways and decrease our carbon footprint, deforestation, etc. This is when rhetoric skills come into play. Instead of having a finger-pointing, screaming-in-your-face argument, a civilized discussion of the different points of views, both being willing to be persuaded, would be much more productive.
It is true that our society have been involving around the money. I would definitely agree that we are focusing more about "money" than other stuffs. It was not a big surprise for me that our society have been changing this much. However, the better part of today's society is that we have the power to prove and discovery by using scientific method on almost everything. Therefore, you have the power to disobey and overturn those big companies as long as you have enough power to do so (yes, money again) However, they is some cases that money can't buy you everything. For example, MLK did his protests by selling his "dream." Gandhi using his "will" to persuade people to stand up against the British. I would say that in the right time with the right manner you can actually stand up against a huge enemy, which in your case is to save the environment.
DeleteHey Becky,
DeleteYour opening lines are a great and clear introduction of the types of rhetoric that we see everyday. A lot of these types of rhetoric too go against what the modern conception of rhetoric is. We just do not see these ads and novels as a form of rhetoric because we believe rhetoric to be based in factual knowledge. Not artistic examples like advertisements and novels use. Nice job with the writing.
In regards to everyone being allowed to speak in order to influence their society in ancient times (and this is a question for everyone)--do we now have such influence even though we have the freedom of ideas, beliefs, and discourse? Does and can our rhetoric take influence above the powerful force that drives our society, money?
DeleteI had no idea that the ways people use rhetoric has changed so drastically from Ancient Greece to now. I had always thought of rhetoric as a way to persuade someone using facts and emotional appeal. So reading Crowley and Hawhee and learning that rhetoric started as something that did not use facts but opinions surprised me greatly. I have always heard growing up that opinions are no use in an argument because they cannot be proven therefore they are invalid to use in an argument. As Crowley and Hawhee said, if an opinion is brought up in an argument then most people will say that since it is an opinion, it has no place in an argument. But yet, if I think about it, all arguments come from a differing of opinions. You don’t argue with someone if you agree with them, you argue because you have a different opinion than someone else. So the inclusion of opinions in argument like they used to do way back when is a perfectly rational response. People don’t try and change facts, they try and change opinions.
ReplyDeleteI feel like I can really use this in my writing from now on. Before I read Crawley and Hawhee, most of my arguments were very factual, as I was taught to put in facts to back up my points. But now, I feel like I should also include my opinions, as opinions can be just as powerful as facts can be. This will also help with my major, as I am studying international studies. I hope to do something international after I graduate, and I will need to know how to use rhetoric in a very good way if I am going to be on the international scene.
I agree with you in the sense that I also thought that the only way to back up my argument and make it believable was the put in only factual points. Now, as you also said, I feel like I should include some of my own opinions as well because they can be just as effective in proving a point. I also am trying to work as something international, so I will also need to master rhetoric in order to be respected and valued in my work.
DeleteI do enjoy your insight into how our society's evaluation of facts has evolved. The fact that Greeks discounted facts as being unimportant in debate surprised me more than anything else that Crowley and Hawhee wrote. Still I think you're being too hasty in dismissing their importance, just because of the lack of focus that the Greeks and Romans placed on them. Our society still values science, and the facts it provides greatly. And though opinions certainly have more of a place than we usually give them, facts are still useful.
DeleteIm not saying that I will completely discard facts. I just feel like I need to add opinions in now as well. I will still use facts in my writing.
DeleteIt is really cool to hear you are studying international studies! I think it's really nice to have factual arguments. They're clean and straightforward, but backing up points with ethos and pathos (after reading this article) also seem like viable elements in good rhetoric
DeleteI have the same experience too! I am used to use factual proofs to support my arguments. It is hard to provide powerful argument by just using factual proofs on some topics. I am so happy that you let me know I also can use opinions to support my arguments.
DeleteThe author did a great job introducing his “rhetorical situation.” I would say that the author linked his idea to Bitzer’s rhetorical situation very well, especially considering the exigence, the audience, and the constraints. According to Ancient Rhetorics: Their Differences and the Difference They Make, “A rhetorical situation is made up of several elements: the issue for discussion; the audience for the discussion and their relationship to the issue.” Since ancient times, the concept of rhetorical situation has been involved with the politic. Rhetorical situation is a tool to persuade and to judge the citizens since early human history. Even with the diversity we have in today’s society, rhetorical situation still plays an important roll. We use the power of language to persuade others to follow our views. Language is a powerful tool to communicate with others. Therefore, once we combine language with rhetorical situation, it creates an unbelievable weapon. The concept of the language does also apply to writing. It’s a way to communicate with others. In terms of writing and academic work, the rhetorical situation is a core component to any piece of writing. For example, I would define the school assignment as the “issue,” according to the author’s idea. The audience is primary the professor. My job is to solve the issue and persuade my professor to believe in my work that it is the solution to the problem. The same thing also applies to my future. For example, during the interview, I have to sell myself and persuade the interviewer to be sold on my work and my abilities. You can build your own image through out the rhetorical situation because rhetoric is a powerful tool in communication.
ReplyDeleteAnother interesting thing to me is that opinion is often shaped by social norms. The author mentions that most Americans who were born after World War II lived on a gas-and-electricity-based lifestyle. Rhetoric not only influences society but also the very identity of the rhetorician. Whether we are speaking about social norms, or in other words practical rules, is not necessarily right. Ideology is another term that refers to this action and draws a strong conclusion for rhetoric. Strong rhetorical reasoning would be able to persuade others to change the status quo. With that in mind, we are using language to interact with others and persuade others.
Hey Pete,
DeleteThat is an interesting point about how opinion is based in social norms. We like to think that our opinions are personal and exclusive to us, but we usually have them because some person or society convinced us they are right. In a sense, they form the identity of the holder but they can always be changed. Because of that, I don't believe that opinions make up the identity of the rhetor. Good writing Pete.
Hello Pete and Sam,
DeleteI also think that saying that opinions are based off of social norms is a unique perspective that I've never thought of before. I agree with what your saying Sam, in that people do think that their opinions are their own but if you think of where you got some of your opinions from, they most likely were influenced by some aspect of society. This is a unique concept to think about, because if you think about it are any of our opinions ours? Or are all of our opinions formed from different aspects of society? I think this is a unique idea that really shows depth into your writing. Great job!
Thank you guys for the replies,
DeleteI think that the social norms have the huge impact on your opinion. It will have an impact on the rhetorical situation. According to Bitzer, rhetorical situation is related to the exigence,problem that exist, and the constraints that related to "the solution to the rhetorical question." Audience that have the same blackground on the same knowledge is the last core component for bitzer's theory. Therefore, the one commonplaces that they share is the "Situation or experience that they have." Problem that create within the same community is the commonplace for social norms which also involve around time. Sorry, I got to go. I will come back and response to this topic as soon as I got out from the class.
I definitely agree with you. I have the same opinion that rhetoric is a powerful tool in communication. Rhetoric can help us to make persuadable and acceptable arguments when we communicate with others. This is an art of language that make people to follow our views involuntarily.
DeleteIn the piece written by Crowley and Hawhee, it said that, “Aristotle defined rhetoric as the power of finding the available arguments suited to a given situation.” He defines rhetoric as the ability to recognize the argument shown in a piece of writing. Now in modern days, as Richard stated, rhetoric is seen as a negative technique. Many relate it to politics, saying that they need to “stop using rhetoric and do something.” Rhetoric today is looked down upon, almost as if people are trying to trick us into believing false beliefs. Compared to today, “the people who taught and practiced rhetoric in Athens and Rome during ancient times would have found contemporary unwillingness to engage in public disagreement very strange indeed.” People back then found it necessary to disagree with one another in order to make improvements and correct one another.
ReplyDeleteRhetoric is important in writing because it creates a basis for your writing. Identifying rhetoric before you begin writing is an ideal way to begin a good piece of writing. It helps the writer be able to outline the idea of the entire paper or book. By knowing and understanding what rhetoric is, a writer is much more able to plan and complete a good argumentative piece that will be more believable to the reader.
Rhetoric connects to writing because the writer can base their entire writing off of their planned rhetoric. The piece of writing should be based off of what the writer is trying to prove or the point he or she is trying to get across. As Becky stated, if one can get their point across without sounding demeaning, then the reader is more likely to complete the reading and, if the argument is well written, they may even change their opinion to match the writers.
My career plan is very uncertain, although I do know I want to be involved in business. In order to be successful in any business, you must be able to get your point across and your opinion valued. Rhetoric is the most upfront way of accomplishing these things. By valuing rhetoric and improving the way I state my opinion on a matter, I think that in the future I will be much more valued in the workplace. Rhetoric is a great way to make a good impression- for people to know that you are well spoken and able to piece together a good argument to make anyone rethink their previous opinions.
I think that you bring up a very important point. By mentioning how rhetoric connects to your interest in business, you illustrate that rhetoric is key in all walks of life. We tend to associate rhetoric with politics and literature, rarely with the everyday situations in which we find ourselves. But whatever you end up doing later in life, the odds are pretty good that you will find rhetoric to be a very useful skill.
DeleteIt is good point that rhetoric is a great way to make a good impression. That makes sense that doing the same thing or saying the same thing (I mean the same content) by different way will make different impression to others. Understanding rhetoric can help us to make a good impression.
DeleteRhetoric is simply an argument. It is an argument that is designed to persuade an audience on a particular issue. It causes thought provoking discussions about what is right or wrong, who is right or wrong, and why something is right or wrong. But most of the time, it does not lead to somebody winning and convincing the rest of the world that they are the only one who is right. That essentially defeats the purpose, because the point of rhetoric is to initiate a discussion. If everyone agrees with the rhetor, then there is nothing to discuss.
ReplyDeleteI think the most interesting point brought up in the reading is that today, you cannot win an argument without facts on your side. Facts are what I try to use the most often to back up my arguments. This is the way that rhetoric has changed in society and ancient rhetoricians would be disappointed. Crowley analyzes an old Aristotle quote by saying that facts are not developed by rhetors themselves, but rather “found in existing circumstances” (11). This defeats the purpose of rhetoric to Aristotle because he sees it as an art. Today, we have lost that sense of rhetoric as an art; art implies beauty or charm. Now, we view rhetoric as deceiving and devious because we associate it with politicians trying to persuade us for their personal gain.
Becky brings up another good point from the reading that ties in well. Sometimes, facts can differ among us. The honey example: I say it is sweet, you say it is bitter (9). We are both stating what we believe to be fact, when truly they are opinions. Opinions are the most important part of rhetoric because it personalizes it. That is not to say that opinions define who we are. This is another misconception brought up that causes rhetoric to be viewed in a negative light. The misinterpretation is that if we try to change a person’s opinion on something, we are in a sense changing that person’s identity. It is important to know that opinions do not equal identity. Everybody can change their opinion on something if they want to.
The importance of opinions is that they differ among all of us. As a writer and speaker, this is good to know because it is what facilitates the rhetorical situation. We all disagree on certain aspects of life, and that is what causes rhetorical discourse to occur. I don’t believe that people should walk to class because it is too slow, so I tell my friends that. They tell me if everybody is on skateboards then the campus will be a mess of crashes. We agree to disagree. We use rhetoric everyday and practicing it is important. It gives us a strength that depends on our ability to think thoroughly. It will be important to me in the future as a manager (management major) because I am going to have to convince people everyday that what they are doing for me is worth the work.
Thanks to this reading I became aware that rhetoric has evolved since first rhetoricians’ theories. Ancient greek thought that rhetoric arguments should be grounded on community beliefs, opinions were source of knowledge and rhetoric should be situated in a given place and time. Furthermore, they considered language as a way to do many things such as teach, give pleasure, move…
DeleteOn the other hand, modern rhetoric theories ground proofs on facts and testimony, people opinions are usually considered unimportant. Moreover, “language’s role is limited to the communication of facts”.
Rhetoric did not have the same meaning over the history and Crowley and Hawhee show that change accurately.
In the ancient civilization, rhetoric was used to make decision and audience was willing to be persuaded by good arguments and to change his point of view. Nowadays, when we talk about rhetoric in political debates, I am not sure that rhetors are willing to change their point of view.
Modern rhetoric tends to use more factual arguments but as becky and Sam noticed, facts can differ among us. As a speaker it is important to know different ways to use rhetoric and what are the best kinds of arguments in a given situation. As a writer, because I can’t use my body or my voice to teach my thoughts, I have to put myself in reader’s situation in order to make the best argumentation and be sure the audience will understand my thoughts. Get under control rhetoric would be important in my future because as a skiing coach or as a manager of a wine bar I will need to teach my skills and be convincing.
Rhetoric in the text is defined as a way to decipher “whose opinion is most accurate, useful, or valuable.” Rhetoric, by this definition, is a way individuals can tell whether or not someone’s opinion was of any use to them or if it had validity.
ReplyDeleteOther definitions that were mentioned in the reading were definitions from ancient times referring to rhetoric as a way “to make decisions, (and) resolve disputes.”
Rhetoric can be used in a number of ways.
The way I would define rhetoric would be to say that rhetoric is the way in which someone uses words to persuade/ argue. Alike the txt, when I first think of rhetoric I envision a speech being made by some politician on an important issue. This politician I envision is using powerful rhetoric in his/her speech in order to inform or argue a certain point. Although this is only one use of rhetoric, rhetoric can be used in a number of ways to argue a point.
Knowing rhetoric and how to use it properly is important in today’s society for a number of reasons. Rhetoric helps one prove a point. Rhetoric is used to persuade someone of something, and when you are confident in your skills regarding rhetoric then you can properly and effectively make/persuade someone with your argument or use of rhetoric.
Rhetoric connects to writing in many ways. The most common way rhetoric connects to writing is in arguments. Rhetoric is used in writing when someone is writing an essay that is arguing a point. While using rhetoric in writing, there also needs to be facts and evidence in order to support the argument that’s being made.
Rhetoric and the rhetorical process have always played a large role in my academic life. I have been conditioned since middle school to learn how to form an argument and opinion on a topic and tactfully argue my point. I would assume that rhetoric has played a similar role in many other people’s lives as well because it’s a critical part of academia.
Regarding my major (international studies), rhetoric is very useful especially for foreign negotiations. “If, for some reason, the people who negotiate international relations were to stop using rhetoric to resolve their disagreements about limits on the use of nuclear weapons, there might not be a future to deliberate about.” The art of rhetoric is also important to me because it’s a way that I can effectively discuss my opinions and thoughts with people who may feel differently than I do. Rhetoric is very important in my major for the use of effectively communicating crucial points and problems with others, but rhetoric is also Without rhetoric being used in talks with leaders and diplomats around the country, the United States foreign policy wouldn’t be as efficient or effective as it is now.
Rhetoric is communication that takes place between humans every day; influenced by ideologies, culture, and perception. However, people have the tendency to think that rhetoric is simply lies told to us to keep us happy, we're wrong. Rhetoric is, in fact, a mode of argument in which all ideas are presented and opposing sides listen to opinions, given that the mind is impressionable and may be changed--unlike modern arguments in which the person who can yell the loudest bullshit wins. That being said, ancient rhetoric is--in simple terms--one person convincing the other person that they are right because they have the most convincing argument; whereas modern rhetoric is censored due to people being sensitive to ideologies, social issues, and "things that just make you feel plain uncomfortable,"--bit ridiculous don't you think? However,rhetoric is extremely useful in getting a point across, that is to say, the rhetoric must be so appealing that it is able to shape, even the slightest bit--implanting an idea in the mind of the audience.
ReplyDeleteRhetoric is essential to life--in any field one must be able to persuade their audience that they are correct, as well as being open to ideas that may actually be more logical--however you may perceive it-- than your own ideas. A field that comes to mind in which rhetoric is essential is advertising. In advertising, one must be able to persuade an individual, a small group of people, the masses, any number of people, that the product which they are selling is necessary in their lives that without it their life is incomplete. I have to convince you that you not only want my product, you need my product and without it you will be unhappy, but if you submit you will be happier as a result. My rhetoric should be able to change your ideologies, manipulate what you think, and implant ideas in your mind to make you think I'm right and you are wrong--"language [can] bewitch people, [can] jolt them out of their everyday awareness into a new awareness from which they [can] see things differently. Hence its persuasive force."
The point of rhetoric, after all, is to change opinions (Crowley and Hawhee). This totally represents my understanding about rhetoric. Rhetoric is about how to make proper argument in the specific situation. It is used in anywhere, such as ads, debates, teaching and writing.
ReplyDeleteThis is important to know and understand rhetoric because this is a powerful weapon in our life. It can help us to make our argument/thesis stronger so that our writing or language will be more influence. For example, the most obvious one that we are taking writing class now so that understanding rhetoric can help us to make argument stronger even if the point we use is the same. Another example, it always happens that different people appeal the same thing have different effect. I think in large part because of the way they approach.
Additionally, I believe all the writing needs a rhetorical situation. Otherwise, you can barely produce a convictive and powerful piece. Dull points cannot effectively persuade people.
Understanding rhetoric helps me becoming a better writer in this class. It also makes me doing better in my major. I want to major in business. There are large parts about plans in business major. Plans are all about create strong “reason” to persuade people. Understanding rhetorical could help me to do better on creating persuadable plans.
Nowadays, rhetoric is extremely important in our society. Maybe people often are not aware it, but they practice it anywhere. For example, ads are used a lots for promotion. This is a part that highly needs rhetoric. Rhetoric helps people to find a proper way to persuade people.
After I graduate, I will really need rhetoric because I want to be occupied in business field. This field is all about how to make people believe you. Aristotle addresses rhetors can control effects of language – that they can make language do what they want it to do. Therefore, there is really important that you how to introduce/promote your production in business. Sometimes, as the same kind of production, salable productions maybe just be promoted more appropriate, and they are not necessary better than other productions. This is all about rhetoric.
Rhetoric is the way by which we communicate our opinions and attempt to show other people our point of view. In modern times, the word rhetoric has negative connotations particularly in the political sphere, where it is seen as a tool for dishonest politicians to blind the public to the truth. But as Crowley and Hawhee illustrate in their paper “Ancient Rhetorics”, rhetoric is not only a useful tool for any conversation but it is an integral part of a functional society. It is important to understand rhetoric because it gives us the power to change the world around us without the need to resort to violence. Understanding rhetoric is also a requirement if one wants to be a critical thinker as it teaches us how to separate a good argument from a bad one and how to find flaws in even the best works.
ReplyDeleteIn writing rhetoric is used to form the argument that the writer is attempting to convey in the piece. After the writer forms his thesis and finds evidence to support it, he needs to draw conclusions from it and work to create what Crowley calls a “network of interpretation” by which Crowley means that without the writer’s interpretation of the facts stated in his work the facts have no real value as rhetoric with the writer’s interpretation of them because perception is a subjective process and one person’s interpretation of the implications of the presented fact could be different from the interpretation the writer intended which removes the persuasive power the piece of writing.
Rhetoric is the parameter set within which we speak. It defines the degree of accuracy that each word, term, and phrase combination can have. This does not make them necessarily obvious, especially in terms of simile, metaphor, or other comparisons, though the point stands. It is generally fit to the purpose of communication, or more specifically convincing someone of the point(s) made within it.
ReplyDeleteAs Daisy has mentioned, public disagreement has become an increasingly disowned method of speech. Current society says that it places so much emphasis on individuality, but there is within it still the pressure to fit in by blending in, and the social infrastructure to support that. How far are we really from unity through uniformity? We label each other readily, and the articulation of the average statement is at an incredible low, and misinformation is easier to spread than it has been in previous eras.
Like Francoise brings up, facts and opinions have had different roles in arguments at different places and times. The presence of opinions and subjectivity is what allows for communication as we know it, and the changing of them is the goal of rhetoric and much of speaking at all.