Rhetoric Making Sense Of Human Interaction And Meaning-Making Summary

The author’s main argument in “Rhetoric: Making Sense of Human Interaction and Meaning-Making” is that rhetoric does not need to be complicated if writers incorporate certain elements to their writing. Downs further analyzed the elements that contribute to rhetoric such as symbols and signals, motivation, emotion, ecology, reasoning and identification. The author emphasized that writers can learn how to deliver their writing effectively once they are more aware on how rhetoric works. Downs constantly assures that rhetoric is quite simple and does not need to provoke fuzziness. Even though the term rhetorical is applied to everything, the author of the article made it clear that the “rhetorical” thing is situated. The example provided by the author in this article, further guides our understanding on what rhetoric

It is obvious that literacy contributes to success (logos), that the more fortunate should help people in necessity because it’s the right thing to do (ethos), and that emotion needs to be brought before the eyes in some occasions (pathos) so the audience can be persuaded. Furthermore, the reviewers needed to identify with the writers and everyone else that was a member of the rhetorical ecology. The author wrote this to help readers and writers understand some basic rhetorical principles as they continue to study rhetoric. This argument matters because most people tend to be confused on what rhetoric is and how it should be applied to writing. The author seems to agree with readers and writers on rhetoric being considered confusing but also disagrees with them by stating that rhetoric can be quite simple if elements are used appropriately. A term I came across was pisteis, which is pathos, ethos and logos, elements that can be used in persuasion. Another term I came across was pervasive: widespread of a thing throughout people or an