I agree with the suggestion that rhetoric defines the topes and poetry provides the examples. I don’t agree that rhetoric and poetry are distinctly different from each other. I think rhetoric uses poetic techniques in writing in what rhetoric calls arrangement. There is a certain type of presentation that is appealing to audiences and a part of poetry is focused on the way it flows. The way words are framed are an important part of both rhetoric and poetry. The way writing is framed affects the strength of the writing as a whole, and this partly includes diction which is a significant part of rhetoric. Rhetoric and poetry are both written to an audience that is not present and both are presenting an idea in hopes of making other people see certain things through their view. And another essential thing they share is the need for narration, I didn’t think automatically that narration was an important factor but when it was pointed out in this week’s reading then it made a lot of sense.

Something I question though is the sentence “to speak or write is to perform a positive ethical action” (1194). The reason I think this might no longer be true is because so much writing can be seen as unethical, the exact thing I’m thinking of is cyberbullying. Before social media made it so easy to publish our immediate thoughts without thinking, many people write things that may not be ethical and may be something that really shouldn’t have been said.

I enjoyed reading about how delivery wasn’t always important and no one is quite sure when it became important. But on page 328 it brings attention to the author of Rhetorica ad Herennium and the fact that they placed importance on delivery saying that without it the other parts of rhetoric weren’t effective. I think delivery does play a large role in presenting a piece of writing because the way it is delivered is what draws attention and then lets the other aspects of writing take place. It talks a lot about the physical delivery, such as gestures, fluctuation in tone, and facial expressions. All of this is also taught in drama classes and is learned by all actors which was talked about in the beginning of the chapter. Something I’ve been paying close attention to is the word “invention”. Once again I see it as it describes the process of memory and the use of memorization on page 331. It makes sense that punctuation is what keeps delivery alive in writing as it tells us where the rhetors would pause and stop speaking. Also delivery is in the formation of the structure like in poetry. The clearest example that comes to mind is Dr. Seuss and the way his writing could sometimes be all over the place, even in circles that make you turn the book around. Or in poetry when you place one sentence on one side of the page and the next sentence on the other side. I also love when on page 337 I am discouraged from using topic sentences and separate paragraphs for different topics. I am the type of person to just write continuously and then when editing I have to take all the different topics I combined into one paragraph and rearrange the order of the sentences in hope that it all works out in the end. I still remember when one of my teachers finally told me that I was indeed allowed to start sentences with “and”, and “but”. I was confused as to why for so many years I was forced to find a different way to begin my sentences, when in the end I began to use those words happily at the beginning of my sentence. I think invention also relates to the part that was describing how to use different tools to visually attract people to writing on such things as flyers. Using different fonts and colors and bold or underlined words is a form of invention. Inventing ways to best attract the attention of the audience. 

Chapter 11 explains the importance of our very first assignment, which makes me wish I had read it before. Learning of how useful it is to copy and imitate other great author’s shows how beneficial writing has been to rhetoric. Being able to look into others writings allows us to improve our own writing. Reading aloud helps to develop the ability to make writing into something truly beautiful. Writing has a purpose, that is rhetoric, and being able to please people makes it more likely they will continue to listen or to read. There are certainly some writings where authors have not achieved the ability to make a sentence flow. Reading aloud to find where punctuation should or should not be is a great technique that I should use more and will try to use more. There is just so much to learn from previous authors and so many techniques that can be used and further developed by the writers learning from them. Something technology has taken away from the beauty of writing is texting. Texting doesn’t involve punctuation and most terms have been abbreviated. Texting is one of the main forms of communication and when we send more text messages than we simply write it changes the way we form sentences. We lose the ability to utilize punctuation and strong diction. We ignore it because it’s no longer necessary to use in order to communicate with people. Ignoring the tools we have on a daily basis really affects the strength of our ability to sit down and create a writing. 

I found all the information about the development of feminism in rhetoric arena very interesting. Feminism in general is interesting and to understand the very beginning of it makes it even more attention drawing. Rhetoric used to be limited to men which I found interesting especially the part where they described how men were happily expected and welcomed to study in any field in college while for women they were discouraged and not supported to be interested in any subject. Rhetoric is useful no matter what you field you go into so I think it’s great how these women paved the way so that everyone could study rhetoric. It’s also important to see the expansion of rhetoric happen during the time of slavery. A significant writer during this time was Frederick Douglas. His writings are very moving and expose an entire world that people were not experiencing themselves. In this way rhetoric plays an important role in enticing people to explore new perspectives and to learn of experiences they hadn’t imagined

Essay 2

Print

Print was a huge part in the evolution of rhetoric. It changed the way rhetoric would be used and changed how audiences received information and the way audiences could be persuaded.

The creation and use of print has had huge effects on the world, and changed the culture as a whole. One of the most important parts of writing is how is brought people together and into one community. This brought the same knowledge to everyone and when print took off libraries made the general knowledge available to the population. Bringing general knowledge to the population increased the desire to learn to read, overall improving the literacy rate and allowing authors to reach a larger audience.

One of the most significant parts about print and libraries is how it made information accessible to all. This is important because being able to find more information on a topic strengthens the use of logos. It allows fellow rhetoricians to build off of each other and in that way they can strengthen their writing through use of logos and ethos. They can present facts and information that have been discovered and documented and that improves the persuasive power of a writing. When reaching out to people who are more oriented around science and math it would make more sense to focus on logos in order to connect with them. With print it is easier to use those facts and strengthen logos which helps in connecting with that specific audience. With writings published, stored and easily accessible it is easy for someone writing to draw out specific points and approach them with clear arguments. This creates stronger arguments and increases the rhetorician’s ability to write persuasively.

Print also allows events to be documented and which produces evidence that supports other arguments. An interesting way rhetoric has changed because of print is the ability to persuade people to behave in one way by presenting an event that happened to someone else and was written about. An example of this is, is when doctors, parents, counselors etc. are trying to explain the dangers of alcohol poisoning, one of the most successful ways to get the desired results is use a real story of someone else, who died tragically because of it. This is called the identifiable victim effect, it is effective because of the use of pathos and it reaches out to the target audience because typically the example is someone within the same age range which makes it real and really connects to the audience.

With print came new styles of writing. One example of a new writing style is narrative. Using narrative as the style of the writing is a good way to put pathos to use. Developing ethos is what makes the authors writing more credible. If you build yourself up to connect with the audience they are more likely to continue to read and listen. Also developing ethos, groups you with the audience and by finding common ground the audience will more likely accept you and then accept your ideas. Print and media has made it easier to build up that ethos, because things about the author/presenter may have been published and media creates wide known reputations. With these widely known reputations it makes it easier for a rhetorician to develop ethos.

The five parts of rhetoric according to Boethius included memory and delivery. Memory and delivery become less important when it is being presented in the written form, and delivery played a very large role in the success of a speech and the persuasiveness. The important part of an argument is that all the factors are put in together. The difference is that now memory and delivery aren’t as important, because so much of writing is through media sources. Memory isn’t important as we now have screens for presenters to read off of while presenting. The politicians delivering their speeches also have people who write for them. Because of these new opportunities the importance placed on memory and delivery has significantly decreased. Print changed the ways in which rhetoric is most efficiently presented and changed the strengths of rhetoric. An important part about writing a persuasive argument is being able to shift your argument around the strengths available. This goes into the fading importance of memory and delivery. With print, memory and delivery are not the strong points of rhetoric, and more attention is placed on information from other sources and

Print brought gossip, and information into the population which changed the landscape of media because now information of events happening throughout the world was brought to the general population. A great example of this is the newspaper. No longer did people have to wait for information to be passed through people, or delivered through letters. Because this general knowledge is provided to everyone it makes it easier for a rhetorician to present their ideas because the audience they are speaking to will generally be aware of the topics being presented.

Print created a massive change in culture as a whole. With print news was spread to more people and information was more easily obtained. These are the things that changed rhetoric. Because everyone could be made aware of specific things it led to the ability to have massive followings of one event. With things like the printing press it was easy to reach out to large numbers of people and provide them with news reports and easily rile people up against a cause. This gave rhetoric a chance to alter the response people have to different situations presented. Public relations is an example of this because to maintain a certain image they change the wording and presentation of information through writing to affect consumer’s view of things. This added a new use for rhetoric.

Print changed the strengths of rhetoric and added new abilities for rhetoric to utilize. Print created more uses for rhetoric and expanded its opportunity to reach out to people. Print strengthened the power of rhetoric by allowing it to be spread quickly and efficiently.

The success of rhetoric comes from the ability to reach out to people. John Locke speaks of how language ultimately is used to communicate with people. An interesting thing I found was how it is important for the people listening to be “excited” by the same words being spoken. This is because what a person is saying needs to be understood and attract the attention of the audience. More complex ideas make the use of language more complicated because more words have to be used which means more opportunities for misinterpretation and confusion. I believe this because even reading this I’ve gotten confused and twisted around a bit. Misinterpretation is the cause of many problems. A significant one I can think of immediately is the Bible. Complex ideas have been interpreted in many ways and everyone believes the other is incorrect. With one text many ideas are being receives. This is because language is not perfect and cannot fully encompass the ideas behind the insignificant words. The words are nothing without an idea behind them, but sometimes the words do not fully explain the original meaning. This why language is not perfect. If language is meant to share an idea and yet cannot, then language is not perfect. The end goal is to be able to communicate with others and that end goal is achieved making words and language critical to our culture.

Conversation had such an importance placed on it during Madeline Scudery’s time. It was an art that got her into a different society where she was able to be successful. The idea of a conversation was to better everyone in the conversation. It was to be agreeable but also provocative enough to be interesting to the group. The beginning of her work is just about having to listen to other women speak of trivial things. It is complaints of listening to and trying to participate in conversations where nothing of any significance is spoken. This was interesting to me because whenever I spend time with my mom and her friends they endlessly talk about something their children did and what activities they’re participating in and just continuous amounts of dull thoughtless comments on each other’s lives.  This is what Scudery is speaking about in the beginning of her writing. Because of this it would make sense that a conversation, a conversation of worth, should be provocative and should bring new understandings of topics to all involved in the conversation. If conversation is an art it should teach people something and should force them to think and carefully articulate their opinion on a topic not simply blurt out a random fact about their day. A conversation doesn’t have such high standards today, but it is still one of the most important parts of our days and conversations lead to better understandings of each other and shows what we have to learn from another.

Extrinsic proofs add value and detail to an argument but extrinsic proofs cannot form an argument on their own. Rhetoric as we have seen is about invention which is why it makes sense that in order to utilize extrinsic proofs you must invent ways to incorporate them into the argument so that they are useful. The process or set up that is provided on page 201 is how I think most of us were taught to incorporate our supporting data for writings. When incorporating proof we have to explain how it is related to the subject of our writing, explain why it is important to the topic, and then use it to support our writings.  Without explain the relevance of the proof it isn’t useful and doesn’t provide the support we need for successful and persuasive writings. I think trusting a witness testimony is somewhat risky especially when they may be benefitting from the result that their testimony may bring. However finding a witness that is completely unbiased isn’t truly possible when they use witnesses to build up the character of someone because anyone trying to build up the character will be trying to help give a positive view and not provide any details on anything that could create a negative view, therefore the testimony is not fully revealing of the actual truth. Using this testimony as extrinsic proof is difficult. Part of extrinsic proof are common authorities and I thought it was interesting how Katy Perry is a common authority for things such a skin care products. I never really thought about how her testimony to its use was considered an extrinsic proof or that she would be a common authority. There is a difference in community authorities however, though the basic requirement to be a community authority is to be well known and respected in the community. Because Katy Perry is well known and is a part of the certain type of community that would consider using the product her testimony is valuable. It makes sense now that I’ve learned more about the use of testimony, and I understand why they also use the testimony of real people who used something like a weight loss program. But I think using their testimony is another example of untrustworthy and unbiased testimony. They are being paid to be on television and say that the product works well and they are trying to create a positive view of the product. The main thing I thought was interesting to hear and further backed up the idea of rhetoric was that extrinsic proof does not work without invention. 

One thing that comes up repeatedly is how important it is to have all critical components of rhetoric present when writing. The parts of writing do not work when they stand alone. Ethos seems to be the best way to begin a writing because it can gain the attention of the audience by reaching out to their emotions and drawing them in. There is a lot of things that ethos accomplishes, however, ethos can be too overpowering and hinder the success of the writing. I think a definition of rhetoric that I am beginning to see is that rhetoric is not only the art of persuasion but also the art of balance. A successful piece of writing will depend on the balance that is struck up between the different parts of rhetoric that we have been discovering throughout the classical period and now in the medieval period. Ethos, Pathos, and Logos are the three arguments primarily used in writings. But too much of one can make the writing ineffectual and not only that but each audience will be more receptive to different tactics. That is also something that has been picked up along the way throughout the readings.

The use of language is also important for the success of the argument being made. The use of positive and negative words is an important tactic that sets up the argument by setting in the feelings the author has to the subject that is being presented. The example of the woman writing about Sarah Palin and President Reagan was very interesting to examine and her choice of words created the tone that made her emotions so strong that they affect the reader. Diction is an important part of creating an argument because strong word choices, that have strong emotions attached to them, create an image in the mind and when used correctly affects the reader’s emotions on a certain subject. Playing on the readers emotions continues to be a critical part of an argument.

With the readings all piling onto each other, and each author continuing the argument made by an author before, makes the definition of rhetoric more complicated and thorough. While some things are reinforced, new things are added in and I think that is what is beginning to reveal how an arguments success is dependent upon the balance of the components within the writing. Part of rhetoric is persuading through the balance of the argument.

The five parts of rhetoric are invention, disposition, style, memory, and delivery. If any of these components are missing then the whole art of rhetoric is ruined and useless. Every part of a speech is critical for its success. In the same way ethos, pathos, and logos all work together to form a successful argument. It is important to shift the strength of your argument to best fit the audience you will be trying to reach out to. When reaching out to people who are more oriented around science and math it would make more sense to focus on logos in order to connect with them. Even though you can focus in on one part of rhetoric, logos, ethos, and pathos should be used and the five parts of rhetoric should always be used together. If you’re reaching out to moms through one of those magazines the stories mostly use ethos and pathos. Using narrative as the style of the writing would be a good way to put pathos to use. Developing ethos is what makes the authors writing more credible. If you build yourself up to connect with the audience they are more likely to continue to read and listen. Also developing ethos, groups you with the audience and by finding common ground the audience will more likely accept you and then accept your ideas. The important part of the argument is that all the factors are put in together. The only difference is that now a day memory and delivery aren’t as important, because so much of writing is through media sources. Memory isn’t important as we now have screens for presenters to read off of while presenting. The politicians delivering their speeches also have people who write for them. While memory and delivery have loss importance in rhetoric, disposition, invention, and style are all critical factors in the success of a writing. Ethos, and pathos are dependent upon the style and the way the argument is formed. 

Pezzulo starts her writing with a background story of her life. She begins her writing use ethos and attempts to draw people in that way before she continues on with her writing. There are many ways to begin a piece of writing. I think there are a lot of bonuses to beginning this way. If you start by explaining your character then it can make the rest of your writing more influential and people may trust it more if you set yourself up to be a credible source of information. Character was said to be the pattern of behavior of personality found in an individual. If you’re explaining something about yourself, some of that pattern will be revealed and that is how the audience will understand your character (Crowley, Hawhee, 147).

Part of rhetoric during the beginning of the medieval age was used to move the audience to understand and apply meaning to their lives and that is still a significant role that rhetoric continues to play. Christianity and religion in general use rhetoric every time they speak. They try to move their audience to apply what they are teaching to their everyday life. Rhetoric was affected a lot by Christianity who did not support classical learning. But the Crusades brought classical learning back as the Arabs interacted with them and provided insight into a different culture that had different types of learning and different kinds of information. It is the arrival or reappearance of classical learning that led into the Renaissance and since rhetoric is invention of the speech I think it is clear how rhetoric continued to be developed through the Renaissance which is an era of invention and progress.

Hildegard of Bingen was the first woman who contributed to rhetoric and it’s interesting how she was considered the “father of the church” even though she was a woman and the only woman who has an entire volume devoted to her. And yet she is called a Father. It’s an example of the kind of behavior woman are pointing out and going against today.

 Style and arrangement are a very important part in speech and writing and can really change the affect it has upon the audience. The three techniques to be used in writing and speaking are logos, pathos and ethos. These are the main ways to form a successful argument, by connecting to the audience on an emotional level, by being logical and having evidence, like statistics, to support your argument, and connecting with the audience so that they believe you are someone they should listen to and trust. How we arrange our speech matters because different audiences will be attracted and drawn to different things and respond differently than others. The premise and conclusion are two critical parts of the argument. If the conclusion does not support your premise then the argument is unsuccessful, obviously. A probability was defined as any kind of statement that predicts something regarding human behavior. The idea was to be able to make a statement and then prove how your premise was correct. It was advised to start with accepted premises and then move on to ones that are not as widely accepted. I think that is a good way to start any argument because you can draw people in by pointing out things they do know and then flip to something related but different and show them why what you are presenting is correct. I think Socrates did this all the time. He would take examples of what a person would do in a situation according to what they themselves had stated they would, and then added in a different situation where what they had said they believed became more complicated. He would then wrap it by saying so then isn’t it this and the second debater would either be forced to accept what Socrates had said or find some way to prove how his original idea was correct. I’m thinking more specifically about when he is talking with a man who is headed to the courthouse to put his father in jail because his father had murdered someone. I’m not going to lie Socrates is one of my least favorite people but he makes this argument into a complicated one twisting this man (I cannot think of his name) into knots, although the man manages to stick to his original stance on the issue. What I am trying to get at is how important arrangement and style is, and I think a good technique for an argument is starting with what people know and then leading them down a different path with that knowledge. That also deals with common topics and is another way they can be used in an argument.

Aristotle lays out the three parts of persuasion in detail that was at times quite befuddling. The main three parts are how to produce, present and arrange persuasion in a speech. An important part of speech is how it is presented. This refers to specific word selection, because there are many ways to say the same thing and how it is said affects how the audience will react. Framing is an important part of a speech and different word arrangements can create different tones and change how a speech is received by the audience. For example prohibiting vs. protecting create two different feelings in an audience. Saying we should prohibit abortion sounds different than we should protect unborn children but they mean the exact same thing. Aristotle said rhetoric is about demonstrating and that when we are persuaded when something has been successfully demonstrated. Demonstrating what is right and what is good should be easier than demonstrating what is wrong and bad, therefore in a court room setting if the judge were to come to an incorrect conclusion the fault would lie on the speakers. The judge in a court room is meant to be unbiased and not perverted by personal emotions which is why rhetoric isn’t just about persuasion based off emotions. Rhetoric’s function is not just to persuade but also to demonstrate the truth, which was an important topic to Aristotle.

On page 103 Socrates tells Polus that his goal is to make Polus adopt his doctrine and maintain it. I think this could be considered a definition of rhetoric. It involves using speech as a tool to persuade someone to agree with them and support their belief. Rhetoric involves ethos, logos, and pathos. Gorgias in this chapter has a great reputation, he’s is spoken of frequently as a great rhetorician who would answer any question. It was his reputation and credibility that attracted Socrates and began this conversation. It is his credibility that makes what he has to say important and valid enough to be persuasive. Socrates continuously creates more questions that can’t help but make Polus see holes in his argument.

 In chapter 3 we see how to use simple and complex Questions. The example questions “Is it a good or a bad thing”?, “should it be sought or avoided?”, “ Is it right or wrong?”, and “is it honorable or dishonorable?”(pg. 69). These are the way Socrates frames his questions when he is talking about whether it is worse to be the wrong doer than the person who was wronged. He’s asking which is right and which is wrong, he asks is it a bad thing or a good thing. I can see why these questions are beneficial for an argument because it forces them to dig deeper in order to find an answer that supports their position in the argument. If they cannot find an answer that supports their position then they have been forced to recognize a flaw in their thinking, and if the other person who is doing the asking has positive responses to give it becomes even more persuasive.

I have experienced this when I think something is right but when I am questioned and asked to explain something, sometimes I cannot. This makes me think about the topic longer and though maybe eventually I can find an appropriate answer, more than likely I will adjust my position. I don’t always agree with who I am debating with, but my position will change enough that I have been persuaded to agree that I am incorrect. Rhetoric and persuasion is what we use to communicate civilly, and to come to a peaceful agreement on the best way to perform certain activities. Rhetoric is an important part of communication and its development has played a large role in how our society communicates. Rhetoric is an important part of speeches spoken by someone running for a government position, they try and out do their competition by persuading a larger part of the population and therefore taking the position they desired. In this situation getting people to agree with you is very important for your future. Being able to communicate well is a very important part of how things are decided in our society.

Post Number 2

I found it interesting how they all touched on how nothing is truly true. Gorgias believes that all information we gain is provisional, meaning that it is only what we know it to be for a certain amount of time. Dissoi Logoi explains how a statement can be true but false at the same time. Karios discusses how the world is in a constant state of change and how knowledge consists of many contradictions and isn't true.

Gorgias also brings up how we take opinion to be the counselor of the soul and how this is unwise. I find it interesting that we touched upon this earlier in class and how our opinions can be tied to our identity. He says that our opinions are insecure and I think that is a good point because our opinions can be easily swayed which would affect our identity, and if rhetors are attempting to change our opinion and our opinion is tied with our identity, are they in a way attempting and sometimes successfully changing our identities?

The idea that a statement can be both true and false really confused me. I read it a few times and I still don't know if I fully understand what it means to have everything be both true and false. But what I think it means is that I can say that I own a cat. The statement is that I own a cat and because I said it, the statement is false. However, if my neighbor were to speak the same statement it would be true. In this way the statement I own a cat is both true and false. When the idea that everything can be both true and false came to the idea of existence is where I really got confused. How can we both exist and not exist? Does he mean that we don't exist because some people don't know of us and thus in their world we do not exist?

Everything we learn always comes with a "but". Language is a great example of contradictions because there are just so many rules that have their own set of contradictions, "I before E, EXCEPT after C". The world is constantly changing and what is good today may be bad in a year and what is bad today may become good. This makes it important to argue a point while it is relevant because it will not remain relevant for a very long time. People and things change therefore what captures peoples attention changes frequently and in order for a rhetor to make a difference they must act on a situation while it remains important and relevant to the people they are looking to attract.