Boethius
In this part of the reading, I thought it was interesting that Boethius valued logic. This is what makes him different than Aristotle.
Structure of Rhetoric
I found this reading to be somwhat of a review. The one piece of it that I found to be important was the five important parts of rhetoric. They are invention, disposition, style, memory, and delivery. The rhetoric is considered to be imperfect if it lacks any of these.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Chapter 6 Ethical Proof:Arguments from Character
While reading this chapter, there were a few ideas that I found important and/or interesting. The easiest way for me to situate my ideas is to list them out...
Aristotle's two kinds of ethical proof
If I had to choose one of these to use, I would use the situated proof. To me, it seems like it would be hard to invent a character and stick to whatever that character should be all of the time. Whereas, when using situated, you are able to be yourself and use the reputation you have already gained in the community. Considering the example in the textbook on page 200, even if the invented character is someone more like the speakers true self, they have not practiced being that person and I would think they would stumble. It seems easier and more honest as well.
Aristotle’s Ethical Requirements (201)
I think these are extremely important. When you are intelligent, you know more about the topic and can give accurate information. Character is important to establish respect and be trusted. Lastly, expressing good will towards others is necessary to gain an audience.
In response to “Demonstrating Intelligence by Doing the Homework”
When reading this, the thought that came to mind was class discussions here at WSU. I’m currently in a class where we read a book a week and then discuss it at the end. There are many students that aren't taking the time to read the book. Therefore, they come to class with discussion that is hardly relevant and seems to have built off the comments of others who had red the book. This has come to be a pet peeve of mine. They aren't doing their audience a favor by contributing half assed (for lack of better words) comments.
Intimate and Formal Distance
“The choice of grammatical person is the most influential element in establishing voice and distance”
Aristotle's two kinds of ethical proof
· Invented: “rhetors can invent a character suitable to an occasion” (198)
· Situated: use their good reputation in the community as a proof (198)
If I had to choose one of these to use, I would use the situated proof. To me, it seems like it would be hard to invent a character and stick to whatever that character should be all of the time. Whereas, when using situated, you are able to be yourself and use the reputation you have already gained in the community. Considering the example in the textbook on page 200, even if the invented character is someone more like the speakers true self, they have not practiced being that person and I would think they would stumble. It seems easier and more honest as well.
Aristotle’s Ethical Requirements (201)
· Intelligent
· Be of good character
· Express good will towards their audiences.
I think these are extremely important. When you are intelligent, you know more about the topic and can give accurate information. Character is important to establish respect and be trusted. Lastly, expressing good will towards others is necessary to gain an audience.
In response to “Demonstrating Intelligence by Doing the Homework”
When reading this, the thought that came to mind was class discussions here at WSU. I’m currently in a class where we read a book a week and then discuss it at the end. There are many students that aren't taking the time to read the book. Therefore, they come to class with discussion that is hardly relevant and seems to have built off the comments of others who had red the book. This has come to be a pet peeve of mine. They aren't doing their audience a favor by contributing half assed (for lack of better words) comments.
Intimate and Formal Distance
· Intimate seems to be how I would write a letter or poetry. It’s sometimes hard to write a paper for a class and not be professional.
· I use formal distance a lot. I have a hard time putting out emotion and connecting to a reader. It is something I am constantly working on. It makes sense that formal distance is used in a courtroom because be professional is important.
“The choice of grammatical person is the most influential element in establishing voice and distance”
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Chapter 5: Shaping an Argument using induction and deduction
This chapter had a lot of good information. The main point I grasped from it was the tools used to shape a rhetorical argument. I happen to really like the idea of induction and deduction.
The example used in the textbook is:
All people are mortal.
Socrates is a person.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
At first, this sounded like a very silly and obvious example, but then I realized the tools were being used on a small matter and could be used on larger matters as well.
When giving a rhetorical argument, you need to assume your audience has premises. Premises being their preconceived beliefs already in place. In your argument, you can build off the premises of your audience. I think is is going to be very helpful when we give our speeches in class.
I think of it as putting the pieces together for your audience so that they may be convinced by using my argument and building off of their own beliefs.
This idea may sound like common sense, but I had never really thought of it that way. It just makes me want to address premises in each of my speeches from here on out so that they may be stronger and better constructed.
The example used in the textbook is:
All people are mortal.
Socrates is a person.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
At first, this sounded like a very silly and obvious example, but then I realized the tools were being used on a small matter and could be used on larger matters as well.
When giving a rhetorical argument, you need to assume your audience has premises. Premises being their preconceived beliefs already in place. In your argument, you can build off the premises of your audience. I think is is going to be very helpful when we give our speeches in class.
I think of it as putting the pieces together for your audience so that they may be convinced by using my argument and building off of their own beliefs.
This idea may sound like common sense, but I had never really thought of it that way. It just makes me want to address premises in each of my speeches from here on out so that they may be stronger and better constructed.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Chapter 5 and Aristotle Post
Chapter 5 was a lot about common place.
The piece I was interested in most about this chapter was that common places can change depending on the current situation.
It's important to know that depending on laws and current situations common places can change. For example, thoughts on communism have changed over time. When people were afraid of communism, there were different arguments that changed.
There are different questions to consider: What is possible? What is impossible? What is less possible? What is possible in the future? What is impossible in the future? and What is impossible and possible in the past? (pg 151)
These questions can be applied to any topic to determine a common place.
These questions are important when shaping an argument so that a person covers all of their basis and is educated about the topic enough to make an argument about it.
Differnt rhetors had their own ideas about common place, but I think they are pretty similar at their core.
The piece I was interested in most about this chapter was that common places can change depending on the current situation.
It's important to know that depending on laws and current situations common places can change. For example, thoughts on communism have changed over time. When people were afraid of communism, there were different arguments that changed.
There are different questions to consider: What is possible? What is impossible? What is less possible? What is possible in the future? What is impossible in the future? and What is impossible and possible in the past? (pg 151)
These questions can be applied to any topic to determine a common place.
These questions are important when shaping an argument so that a person covers all of their basis and is educated about the topic enough to make an argument about it.
Differnt rhetors had their own ideas about common place, but I think they are pretty similar at their core.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Chapter 3
After reading chapter 3, the most important information I gained was the need to consider all of the different arguments when preparing for a speech. Too often have I been one of those people that has taken my stance and been close minded to all of the different sides to the argument.
The reading explains how you need to be able to know and understand the different sides to the argument in order to address them in your speech. In order to make your speech believable, you need to address why your opinion is the best.
Not only is it important to know the different sides during your speech but it is important to know the different sides so when you are asked questions at the end, you will be prepared to answer whatever concerns a person with another stance on the issue may have.
I think this is important for political speeches. In order for a candidate to be fully prepared, they need to know the opinion of the people with the votes they are trying to keep as well as the ones they are trying to sway.
It all comes down to preparation, and know all sides is the best way to prepare!
The reading explains how you need to be able to know and understand the different sides to the argument in order to address them in your speech. In order to make your speech believable, you need to address why your opinion is the best.
Not only is it important to know the different sides during your speech but it is important to know the different sides so when you are asked questions at the end, you will be prepared to answer whatever concerns a person with another stance on the issue may have.
I think this is important for political speeches. In order for a candidate to be fully prepared, they need to know the opinion of the people with the votes they are trying to keep as well as the ones they are trying to sway.
It all comes down to preparation, and know all sides is the best way to prepare!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)