Natural Talent

Not only in the Classical Period does the discussion of natural talent arise for discussion. It is a debate on whether or not natural talent outweighs the actual learning of something. Of course, in the context of teaching rhetorical methods to your peers, some but not all are going to pick up on the styles and techniques. Natural talent for someone in the context of rhetoric can be considered a good asset to have. In the days of the Classical Period, your self-worth was based on your rhetorical skill and debate. The easier it was for someone to pick up rhetoric means a higher achievable skill level in the eyes of the Sophists. In their minds, a student who is already very observant and adaptable in many situations (like someone who is naturally gifted) is more likely to succeed and improve the realm of rhetoric and teaching. I think natural talent was highlighted back then due to the fact that rhetoric might not work as easily to persuade those types of people. They tend to be wiser, more adaptable, and conscious of the situation. They are also able to master the art of rhetoric faster than those who have to study long hours the art in order to improve.

In today’s society, we don’t refer to many smart kids in the classroom as having natural talent. There has been an increasing number of naturally-talented kids in sports, however. Education today is obviously not as it was in the Classical period. Back then, educational level was based on natural talent and skill level. In Ancient Greece, only the smartest and most naturally talented kids got to move up to a higher education level. In today’s society, there isn’t such a thing as rigid class systems that leave a child behind for not being naturally talented. If the minimum requirements are met, then they move on to the next grade level. In my mind, the word talent has changed just as the educational systems have changed.

KnowledgevsBelief

The difference between true knowledge on a subject and the act of creating belief in the same subject are two different things. Plato prefers the first, being knowledge. True knowledge requires the actual experience of learning and having your own thoughts and opinions on it. Plato finds it hard to believe that an argument changing someone’s mind on justice for example is not very reliable. The argument Plato presents is that arguments that create justice where knowledge is absent can be dangerous. There is no way of knowing for sure what the truth is when there is rhetoric trying to convince a set of jurors on what to believe. Deceitfulness is very easy to get away with in these situations where you have people who have no knowledge being persuaded into believing something someone has said. Rhetoric in these kinds of situations within large audiences (aka “among the ignorant”) that don’t have knowledgeable people. Plato goes on to say that if you have your own knowledge about justice, you will be less likely to be taken advantage of. The real concern for Plato lies in his mistrust of the Sophists. He doesn’t believe that they even know justice, just creating belief for their side and leaving real justice falling by the waistside.

HR: Herrick, Plato, book

The Ariel Quartet

The Ariel Quartet put on quite a moving show. When I say “moving,” it was just that. In years past when the quartet had come to play at VMI, I had never paid much attention. In this attendance, however, I felt myself analyzing the sound of music like I have never before. I noticed the smoothness and upbeat rhythms. I noticed the stories being told through song. As I listened closely, I started to recognize the individual instruments’ sounds and noticed how they varied. Rhetoric lies most certainly inside the music we hear. This performance made me consciously aware of that. The Sophists and Gorgias were all about using words to influence people. Their material back then was mostly in the form of words and sentence structure. I think that they would agree with me when I say this form of rhetoric is just as powerful. The sounds made the scene feel timeless. Much like rhetoric in the form of words, the music is able to influence the audience. The changes made in tempo and synchronicity can make the mood change without much effort. We become so involved with what’s going on onstage that we become apart of the performance itself.

RhetoricEssay_Thesis

Thesis:

The Sophists proved early on that mastery in the art of language can be both profitable and powerful. The ethics behind their teachings however poses some ethical questions. In this essay I will talk about how the Sophists taught their rhetoric, using Plato and his work in Gorgias to show the real intentions of these “masters of fraud” (Herrick 35).

Download Link: Campbell_Rhetor1

Words are often a source of power. Over generations, language as we know it has changed. However, the influence that our words possess and how we portray them remains a source of authenticity to ourselves and to our history. Rhetoric is an interesting subject. The way people throughout history have articulated their words so carefully to give their audiences what they have been asking for is a recurring theme. This interactive relationship with the audience is often what gives us rhetoric in itself. In rhetoric, however, there this negative connotation nowadays that lies in politicians’ words and speech—this is what I originally thought rhetoric out to be. Only a week into this class and I no longer see rhetoric as a shallow tool used by the intellectual. I am still critical of the idea of calling things that people say rhetoric because of what I have come to know it as. I think John Locke explains it best in his two-types of rhetoric theory. He states that there are two types: “order and clearness” which is useful and then “artificial and figurative” which tends to be deceptive (Herrick 2).

In today’s world, what we say follows us wherever we go. How we can form a sentence without thinking about it beforehand is impressive in itself however it does have its pitfalls. We now live in a world where words travel faster than the time it took to say them. Rhetoric is powerful and words are taken very seriously. If we slip up and say the wrong thing, it can come back to haunt us. We see this a lot in politics: media focusing on one phrase of an hour-long speech for example. We see rhetoric being used by the current GOP contenders. One man in contention and currently leading the polls is Donald Trump, who refuses a teleprompter, doesn’t prepare for debates, and somehow comes out on top very frequently in the polls. Then we have the other GOP contenders who seem to have a rehearsed speech that is politically correct and what we have come to understand as the right way to use rhetoric. One thing I have added to ability of rhetorical explanation since beginning this course however is the fact that it can be adapted to the audience. Multiple audiences won’t perceive things the same way as other audiences. Words are put together with the idea of some target audience in mind. This goes back to John Locke’s articulation, order, and clearness, useful in the art of using rhetoric to adapt to any audience and any setting.

Rhetoric in any sense is taken seriously. Words are followed closely only to be picked apart. We are used to seeing this articulate, ornate word play adapted to a particular audience in order to get the message across the best, efficient way possible. Rhetoric has the ability of satisfying the needs of the people and influencing opinion. The most important part of word play is the way it interacts with the people or audience you are talking to. Choose your words wisely and continue to adapt.

Download link for Word file: Campbell_Rhetor(original)

Words are often the source of power. Over generations, language as we know it has changed. However, the influence that our words possess and how we portray them remains a source of authenticity to ourselves and to our history. Rhetoric is an interesting subject. The way people throughout history have articulated their words so carefully to give their audiences what they have been asking for is a recurring theme.

In today’s world, what we say follows us wherever we go. How we can form a sentence without thinking about it beforehand is impressive in itself however it does have its pitfalls. We now live in a world where words travel faster than the time it took to say them. Rhetoric is powerful and words are taken very seriously. If we slip up and say the wrong thing, it can come back to haunt us. We see this a lot in politics: media focusing on one phrase of an hour-long speech for example. We see rhetoric being used by the current GOP contenders. One man in contention and currently leading the polls is Donald Trump, who refuses a teleprompter, doesn’t prepare for debates, and somehow comes out on top very frequently in the polls. Then we have the other GOP contenders who seem to have a rehearsed speech that is politically correct and what we have come to understand as the right way to use rhetoric.

Rhetoric in any sense is taken seriously. Words are followed closely only to be picked apart. We are used to seeing this articulate, ornate word play that at least politicians use to dodge questions. Rhetoric is no longer the chosen and articulated word play but is the spontaneous response that someone can come up with, satisfying the needs of the people and influencing opinion.