Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aristotle's view on rhetoric
Aristotle's view on rhetoric
Aristotle rhetorical analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aristotle's view on rhetoric
Scholars of rhetoric consider the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, one of the great contributors to our present understanding of this art which, since its early origins and until present, has been a controversial field of study because of its association with persuasion and influence. However, an examination of ancient rhetoric and its development by the Sophists and then a study on Aristotle’s theory on rhetoric and how he concluded his findings direct our attention to whether this Greek philosopher only included in his theory what he described as inadequate and non-fundamental Sophistic teachings, or actually built up his theory on their techniques, long bashed and overlooked. In this essay, I consider Aristotle’s rhetoric is an evolution of the Sophists’ discredited methodology. I assert that the sophistic contribution to Aristotle’s theory is more than a partial inclusion of their teachings disdained by ancient orthodox philosophers and some modern scholars. Examined readings of his theory on the art of rhetoric demonstrate his elaborate use of many of sophistic perspectives. Thus, the Aristotelian rhetoric, at heart of the development of our modern studies in this field, can be considered an evolution of the Sophists’ rhetoric, which has lately been the center of study by many scholars who called for a re-evaluation of the Sophists’ long disdained and overlooked techniques.
In order to explain my argument, I will briefly review the main tenets of the sophistic rhetoric and why Plato condemned such rhetoric “foul” and “ugly,” but later retracted and stated that there was a “good rhetoric.” Finally, I will justify why the Aristotelian rhetoric can be perceived as a systemized evolution and progression of the sophist rhetoric.
...
... middle of paper ...
...oulakos claimed that Aristotle “overpowered the rhetoric of the sophists, further helping to discredit their position for centuries” (Allen, 1994, p. 11).
Works Cited
1- Allen, J., (March, 1994). Aristotle and Social-Epistemic Rhetoric: The Systematizing of the Sophist Legacy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Nashville, TN. Paper retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED370110&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED370110
2 – Jarratt, S., (1998). Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric Refigured. Carbondale Southern Illinois University Press. Book retrieved from http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2156/Reader
3- Herrick, J., (2009). The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Olson, Annie. “An Introduction to Rhetoric.” Le Tourneau U, May 2006. Web. 6 Dec. 2011.
Heinrichs had previously worked as a journalist before becoming a full time writer and advocate for rhetoric. He utilizes illustrative examples to convey rhetorical concepts. Furthermore, chapter four reveals the most valuable logos and pathos tactic. Lastly, this book’s use should be continued in this course.
In the story, What is Rhetoric by William Covino and David Jolliffe, there are a wide variety of topics discussed that are inextricably interwoven with the concept “rhetoric.” Rhetoric, as defined by the authors, is “the study and practice of shaping content.” Consequently, my first thought was: Ok, this is a rather broad and opaque description; my successive thought, however, was one of astonishment, inasmuch as the authors went on to further elucidated this jargon. In doing so, the authors distilled the most crucial elements of what is rhetoric— the prevalence of discourse community, and how appealing language is often a precursor to persuasion.
Palmer, William. "Rhetorical Analysis." Discovering Arguments: An Introduction to Critical Thinking, Writing, and Style. Boston: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2012. 268-69. Print.
...o engage in destructive rhetoric are held to task, rhetoric cannot simply be attributed to some state of affairs, while the rhetorician from whose lips the rhetoric emerges is held to no ethical standard. Certainly it is conceivable that rhetoric can have destructive consequences. Rhetoric seems to have played a central role in the deterioration of people’s faith in their systems of government, or the electoral process by which they choose their representatives. A view of rhetoric in which the rhetorician is accountable for the effects of the change they inflict upon the world could lead to less destructive rhetoric and a society which operates on the solid ground of personal responsibility.
Neo-Aristotelian criticism states, that in order to understand rhetoric we must first understand the motivations that caused the speaker to speak. The rise of partisan politics, narrowed the focus of Jefferson’s Inaugural Address. Therefore, to understand his motives, we must first understand the
Since his lifetime the ideas of Aristotle have been carried on through the centuries and have remained a fixture in modern day theory. His interest in the logical, rational side of discourse remain with us today in many forms. For this reason it can be said with little argument that "Aristotle is rhetoric."
Plato and Aristotle are two rhetoricians than had a great impact on the history of rhetoric. Although they were similar in many ways, their use and definition of rhetoric were different. Plato had the more classical approach where he used rhetoric as a means of education to pass down his beliefs and practice of rhetoric to his students. He believed that it should be used to educate the masses, provoking thought, and thereby preserving that knowledge. Plato thought that rhetoric should be used to convey truth, truths already known to the audience, revealed through that dialectic critical thought. Plato also operated on absolute truths, things that are right or wrong, black or white. Aristotle was more modern in that he used rhetoric as a tool of persuasion in the polis. He thought that the main purpose of rhetoric was to persuade, provoking emotions for his audience as a tool of persuasion. Aristotle’s rhetoric was more science based, using enthymemes and syllogism to foster logical thinking. He believed that rhetoric was a means of discovering truth. His rhetoric was highly deliberative since he used it mainly for persuasion. I will discuss their differences in more depth in the following essay.
Rhetoric is the art of effective speaking or writing, and persuasion. Most people use rhetoric numerous of times in their everyday life without their concern or knowing.
In the text Phaedrus, Socrates and Phaedrus consider the nature of the soul in order to assess Lysias' speech, rhetoric in general, and the requirements of good rhetoric for a speaker and an audience. A chariot allegory is given to provide a separation between the rational and impulsive sides of man and suggest the ultimate pursuit of philosophy. Socrates explains the relation of madness to rhetoric by bringing attention to the good gifts that come out of madness, such as the noble lover. There are three lovers discussed throughout Phaedrus that Weaver parallels with the differing ways language can affect us. Through the evaluation of the soul, madness, and lovers, Plato's Phaedrus and Weaver's analysis of Phaedrus, function to provide several
Aristotle. On Rhetoric. The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. 2nd ed. Ed. Trans. Patricia Bizzell & Bruce Herzberg. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2001. Book I, Chapter V. Print.
Neo-Aristotelean analysis is one of the earliest forms of rhetorical analysis and focuses on the methodology of using available means of persuasion to evoke the intended response from the audience. Although the style can be quite limiting in modern analysis, it provided the framework on which modern rhetorical criticism was built.
Butcher, S.H. The Poetics of Aristotle trans. Pennsylvania State University: The Electronic Classic Series, Copyright 2000-2013. Web. 24 February 2014.
... the sophists are significant. They educated many Athenians, providing the country with greater numbers of intelligent, literate persuaders. They impacted the ways that laws were brought about because they were some of the leading thinkers of the time. The sophists also questioned many of the traditionally accepted schools of thought, which planted the seed that eventually grew into the skeptic movement. The skeptics were a group of people who examined the limitations of human knowledge.
Aristotle. The Poetics of Aristotle. Trans. S. H. Butcher. Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000. Print.