Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Rhetoric (n.)

No description

Gina Patterson

on 29 June 2010

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Rhetoric (n.)

Welcome to
the first day of
Rhetoric & Composition. Meh . . .
what the hell is
"rhetoric" anyway? . . . Apple Shiner. Rhetoric is . . . the study of how people use
to persaude people to
believe certain things
act on those beliefs Rhetoric is also . . . a theory of argumentation,
including the parts of an argument
pathos Moreover, rhetoric includes . . . the study of logic in terms of
how arguments are constructed
and how arguments can fall apart Rhetoric also requires . . . an understanding of social, historical context
an understading of the ethics of argumentation
an understanding of philsophy Rhetoric has been around for a long time, and its primary goal has always been to educate students of rhetoric to participate in the public sphere.

Some early rhetoricians include: Sappho (630-570 BC), Gorgias (483-376 BC), Protagorous (481-420 BC), Isocrates (436-338 BC), Plato (427-347 BC), Aristotle (384-322 BC), Cicero (106-43 BC), and Quintillian (35 BC-100 AD).

Early on, there was a good deal of fighting about what role rhetoric played in arriving at Truth. For example, the Sophists argued that Truth is based on community constructions of belief (nomos), via language and symbols. On the other hand, Aristotle claimed that Truth pre-existed language and symbols, and thus philosophy was greater than rhetoric. *One could say that rhetoric is the study of storytelling. *the study of self *the study of reason *the study of emotion, motives, belief *including the Toulmin and
Rogerian models of argument *including the study
of logical fallacies *this requires researching
all sides of an issue *this requires understanding the consequences your argument will have for other people *this requires understanding of epistemology (how we know), ontology (what we perceive to be real), and ideology (what we believe and value and why). Well, according to the notes I took for class . . . Also, in "How Many Rhetorics," William Booth argues that rhetoric influences three types of reality . . . Scientific Facts & Value Judgements The Contingency of Nature Contingent Reality Rhetoric influences how we talk about science and value judgements. Rhetoric can also influence how we understand natural phenonmena. Finally, rhetoric can affect:

people's feelings and actions

how people view each other

the materiality of people's lives

These three contingent realities overlap.
Think about how people viewed Galileo as a heritic for arguing that Earth revolved around the Sun. And, in terms of value judgments, think about how people "justified" slavery, genocide, and colonialism. Think about the current debates about whether or not global warming exists. (Poor polar bears . . . ) Think about the emotions behind the words "handout," "socialism," "special rights," "illegals," and "Protecting our freedoms." *What do these phrases evoke? What do they obscure? Consider rascist, xenophobic, sexist, and homophobic "jokes" and comments: does these influence how people are seen or what opportunities they can have in life? Think about politicians, PACs, and political action committess. Since most voters haven't actually read a bill or policy line-by-line, we make our decisions based on the persuasive appeals made by others. (Yikes.) What violence does this condone? PAST PRESENT FUTURE ETHOS Aristotle Booth claimed that there were three branches or "species" of rhetoric. adds a fourth branch. He claims that every time someone encounters a new argument, like it or not, they change. Maybe this is why we react so strongly against new (different) arguments . . . JUDICIAL, FORENSIC

Describes arguments about the past, often used in the courts to argue for the guilt / innocence of the defendant. CEREMONIAL, EPIDIETIC

Describes arguments made in the moment, often ceremonial speeches. Concerns what is good, noble, shameful, virtuous, etc. LEGISLATIVE, DELIBERATIVE

Describes arguments to persaude an audience for / against some future action. Indicates that reality is based on experience and therefore subjective, to a degree. This also means that values and argumentative standards vary by community / identity--which overlap: INTERSECTIONALITY

Because community and identity markers overlap, everyone is pulled by different aspects of their identity. Also, because one's identity cannot be reduced to one single aspect, a person's power becomes a complex realitionship between identity and community affilitations. Faith, Belief Socio-Economic Class Education Immigration
Status Gender Family Sexuality Gender
Performance Ablity,
Disability Race,
Ethnicity Culture Country of Origin Career Political
Affiliations Audre Lord, Patricia Hill Collins argued that identity wasn't monolithic. This theory of difference came about during the multiracial feminist movement. It has considerable influence on how we view ethos. RHETORIC in a nutshell
Full transcript