ERH201_FinalPaper-1xddghk

Drake L. Singh

Major Garriott

ERH 201 WX-03

5 December 2017

Rhetoric: The Art of Argument

Long ago in the fifth century BCE, in the city of Syracuse on the island of Sicily, two lawyers started the development of a linguistic art that would go on to affect every aspect of our day to day lives. This is the art of rhetoric. Rhetoric involves the various strategies, conditions, and skills required to persuade an audience toward a desired viewpoint or outcome. Rhetoric can be found in everything from a testimony in court to the advertisements we see on television. Rhetoric is carefully used in such presentations with the intention of convincing the audience of a specific argument or point. Since its founding in Sicily, philosophers and orators have dedicated themselves to the study of rhetoric. These rhetoricians attempted to define rhetoric and studied how to most effectively use it. However, while some rhetoricians sought to understand and teach rhetoric for the advancement of society, others simply saw rhetoric as another skill that could be sold to the public. Today, rhetoric is seen as both a useful tool to writers and orators and a deceitful style of presentation aimed at controlling an audience. However, while rhetoric can be destructive in the wrong hands, rhetoric remains an integral part of our lives and always will be. After having studied Aristotle, Isocrates, Cicero, St. Augustine, and Christine de Pizan, I have formed my own view of what rhetoric is, where it belongs, and how it is used. Aristotle taught me what rhetoric consists of and how it can be most effectively used. Isocrates taught me how rhetoric should be used for moral purposes. Cicero taught me how rhetoric should be taught after having learned basic language and oratory skills. St. Augustine and Christine de Pizan taught me how rhetoric applies to different aspects of life, such as religion and women’s roles society. The works and teachings of these rhetoricians, along with my own experience using and observing rhetoric, has shaped my view of rhetoric and thus how I define it.

I would define rhetoric as the art of persuasion and argumentation that takes into account various elements of the speaker, audience, culture, and situation to make an effective change in the way the audience views a dilemma or topic. Rhetoric is essentially the study of how to most easily convince an audience to accept your point. Based on the various techniques and appeals developed by the ancient rhetoricians, such as ethos, pathos, and logos, rhetoric is focused on understanding the audience and the situation and how to best use these to formulate an effective argument. Aristotle divided these three appeals into the Entechnic and Atechnic proofs. Entechnic proofs consist of ethos and pathos, suggesting that the rhetorician must be able to seem credible and use emotions accordingly in their argument. Atechnic proofs consist of logos, doxa or cultural knowledge, and subject matter, suggesting that the rhetorician must be able to display an understanding of the subject or at least present a process to their argument.

Works Cited

Help Received:

Class Notes

E-Portfolio Posts

At the beginning of the semester, I broadly defined rhetoric as the art of argumentation using the three rhetorical strategies (ethos, logos, and pathos). While I still believe this is true, having studied rhetoric and its history further, I now believe that this is only a small fraction of what rhetoric is. Having had the chance to study rhetoric’s origins in Ancient Greece, Rome, and Christian Europe and how notable rhetors from these periods developed and used rhetoric, my understanding and definition of what rhetoric is has drastically changed.

I would now define rhetoric as the art of persuasion and argumentation that takes into account various elements of the speaker, audience, culture, and situation to make an effective change in the way the audience views a dilemma or topic. Although my new definition doesn’t explicitly state it, it still includes use of the rhetorical strategies, instead this is now implied. The main difference between my new and old definitions is that the new one includes more elements that can affect or be used toward the argument. The reason I have made these changes is because my prior knowledge of rhetoric stemmed from being taught that rhetoric was primarily focused on the three appeals, whereas now I have learned that rhetoric takes into account the culture of the era and place as well as the kairos, or timing of when the argument is presented to the audience. In general, over the course of the semester we have explored how different Sophists and Philosophers have defined and used rhetoric and none of them have limited the art of rhetoric to just the three appeals, rather they have defined it as a mastery of the skill of persuasion using every available resource.

From the Agora of Ancient Athens to the streets of Washington D.C., political discourse has become ingrained into our way of life. Although it’s been thousands of years, we still find ourselves arguing over the same things: basic rights, wars, and public policies. However, had we not have seen the emergence of rhetoric and the use of rhetorical oratory among the public, democracy and discourse would not exist as we know them. Rhetoric through deliberation gave the Athenians a means to convey their views on policy to each other, resulting in compromise and progress in the state. In Rome, rhetoric allowed the Republic to flourish by creating a sense of duty and unity among Romans to their State. In Christian Europe, rhetoric allowed the clergy to better understand their religion and more effectively communicate it to their audience, converting thousands of people throughout Europe. In Renaissance Europe, rhetoric was used to revitalize education and ruthlessly to gain political power in the various Italian city states. Rhetoric is not just a set of strategies used to convince a reader, rather it is the mastery of language with which the rhetorician can use to serve any purpose if he has the skill to do so.

Rhetoric in Ancient Athens and Rome was characterized by the freedom of speech citizens enjoyed due to the democratic systems of their governments. Rhetoric was used as a tool to encourage public participation in the democratic process, whether it was law making or the judicial system. Although the use of rhetoric by the average citizen was a controversial topic in both Athens and Rome, these citizens continued to seek education in rhetoric. This helped the art of rhetoric develop as more sophists and philosophers emerged and helped spread the various views and teachings of rhetoric throughout the Greek city states and the Roman Republic. When the Roman empire collapsed and Europe splintered, Roman teachings and ideals were cast off as pagan as Christianity rose to prominence in Europe. Among the Roman traditions that were shunned was the art of rhetoric. Rhetoric was generally regarded as an evil pagan technique of persuasion and deceit. Many Christian scholars, such as Tertullian and Jerome, disapproved of Classical teachings, seeing it a sinful and not beneficial to the mission of Christianity. Other scholars however, particularly St. Augustine, believed that rhetoric if separated from the pagan beliefs of Athens and Rome, could prove invaluable to Christianity.

With the teachings of St. Augustine, rhetoric was switched to a focus on the persuasion and understanding of Christian Doctrine. St. Augustine wrote three major works: The City of God, Confessions, and De Doctrina Christiana. These talked about rhetoric’s use for Christianity in secular, Christianity and the soul, and as a guide for how pastors should interpret and convey the Bible. As the major rhetorician of his era, St. Augustine was able to adapt the domain of rhetoric from a democratic and pagan focused practice, to one focused on the development and spread of Christianity. This change in rhetoric’s domain and cultural use was primarily brought on by the strict doctrine and clergy of Christianity that was seen as law to most Europeans who were afraid of condemnation to hell or excommunication from the church. However, rhetoric was able to have various effects on how Christianity was studied and taught throughout Europe. Much like the Works of St. Augustine, rhetoric had a hand in how pastors learned to study and preach rhetoric to the masses. This use of rhetoric in their faith allowed them to better interpret the Bible and more effectively persuade Europeans to convert to Christianity.

Help Received: Augustine’s De Doctrina Christiana excerpt

After the fall of the Roman Empire, Europe splintered and dissolved into chaos and war. Although Europe lost the empire that gave it stability and law, Christianity took its place as the universal theology that governed this part of the world. During this period in Europe, known as the Middle Ages, Christianity was characterized by a strict doctrine that was taught and enforced by the Catholic clergy. The Christian doctrine was heavily opposed to anything pagan in nature, including Roman and Greek writings and teachings. As a result, much of the works of Roman and Greek rhetoricians were destroyed. However, there were some that practiced and taught rhetoric during the Middle Ages in Europe. Among these rhetoricians were St. Augustine and James Murphy. These rhetoricians sought to adapt the techniques of pagan rhetoric to the more social and Christian society of their time by using rhetoric in preaching and poetry.

The use of rhetoric in the Middle Ages heavily contrasts with that in Ancient Greece and Rome in that where Middle Age rhetoric sought to advance the views of Christianity, rhetoric in Ancient Greece and Rome sought to advance the individual or the state. We can see that the roots of these differences lie in the contrasting societies of Greece and Rome versus Middle Age Europe. Where in Ancient Greece and Rome there was a heavy social pressure to contribute to the state and be the most productive citizen you could be, in Middle Ages Europe there was a heavy social pressure to conform to Christian values which embodied a simple life characterized by fear of God and the clergy. Rhetoric in Greece and Rome sought to bring pride in one’s self and the state, while rhetoric in Middle Ages Europe sought to convince the public that you should submit to and fear God and the clergy who interpret and enforce his laws.

From rhetoric’s beginnings in Ancient Greece, to its refinement in Rome, to its manipulation and adaptation in Europe, rhetoric underwent drastic change. Rhetoric went from an art focused on freedom of thought and expression to a tool used in the campaign of a religion. However, although rhetoric’s uses changed, its basic foundations never changed. The ideas and teachings of the Greek and Roman rhetoricians, such as Aristotle and Cicero, continued to be used and taught, albeit for an adapted use.

Help Received: Ch.6 Herrick

After the assassination of Julius Caesar, a series of civil wars ensued among the Romans, setting the stage for the fall of the Roman Republic and the rise of the Roman Empire. During this time, many men rose to power and either helped unite the Romans or further divided them. It was through speech and rhetoric that these men rose to prominence. By appealing to the people and the Roman Legions, men like Marc Antony were able to rally Romans to a common cause in the midst of the chaos. However, other rhetoricians were cautious of these men and the tumultuous times that they were living in. The most notable rhetoricians, Cicero and Quintilian, focused their work and concern on this subject. They asserted that rhetoric should be practiced by men of virtue, courage, and other desirable qualities, lest they use their persuasion for personal power.

The Roman society was heavily based on class status. On the bottom of the social hierarchy were the slaves, then the plebeians or ordinary citizens, then on the top were the patricians. The patricians were thought to have been born with natural virtue and talent. Much like how Plato believed that rhetoric should be primarily practiced by the Greek aristocracy due to their birth with natural virtue, Cicero and Quintilian thought that rhetoric should be primarily practiced by the patricians. Cicero and Quintilian thought having natural qualities, such as courage and virtue, allowed the patricians to more easily use speech and rhetoric for persuasion and to be able to do so for the good of Rome. They also believed that it was also important that the audience recognizes the orator’s virtue, making a patrician an ideal candidate seeing as how he would command respect among his fellow Romans based on his social class.

Cicero and Quintilian’s focus on a virtuous man when regarding the practice of rhetoric is a clear indicator of the political situation in Rome at the time of their works. During a period of uncertainty and division among the Roman people, Cicero and Quintilian looked towards patricians with natural virtue to quell the fighting and unite Rome with the power of speech, rather than the force of Legions.

Help Received: Cicero and Quintilian Readings