Argument Strategies from Aristotle's Rhetoric

By Mark E. Huglen and Norman E. Clark

Book by Mark E. Huglen, Norman E. Clark This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0534636128
• ISBN13: 9780534636128
• Release Date: May 2003
• Publisher: Wadsworth Publishing
• Length: 33 Pages
• Weight: 3.40 lbs.
• Dimensions: 8.3" x 0.3" x 5.5"

Customer Reviews

The Capacity of Persuasion

I read these works for a graduate seminar on Aristotle. Definition of Rhetoric- capacity of persuasion. Plato is critical of the Rhetoric and the tragic poetry. Rhetoric is approach to political public speeches in the forum. Plato thought that they clouded the mind and thus created a part of his critique of democracy in general. Plato thinks Socrates was killed by rhetoric used by the Athenian democracy. Plato feared the danger of democracy. Poetry appeals to the base human emotions rhetoric, and poetry block rational truth according to Plato. Rhetoric is psychological force of language vs. logical force of language. Psychology leads people to believe things based on emotions. Speech must appeal to the masses in a democracy. Psychology is persuasion, logic is truth. Deduction and induction is arguing logically. Plato says rhetoric is not a technç, (craft) nor is poetry, because they are undisciplined and not uniform in design. Thus, appeal to psychology and emotion can never be done away with in a democracy, thus Plato abhors them and democracy. Plato calls it sophistry this psychological appeal and democracy requires this to exist, so the problem persists. Plato is clear and consistent in his abhorrence of sophistry and democracy. Aristotle's Rhetoric and Poetics are an alternative to Plato. Aristotle's rhetoric tries to strike a middle position. Aristotle says rhetoric and poetry are a technç, the Rhetoric is a handbook. Aristotle says speaker needs to appeal to appropriate information for the particular setting. Much like a lawyer's argument, not just relying on facts, need to appeal to people's emotions. Aristotle does understand that rhetoric can be used in a harmful way. Aristotle lays out three features in rhetoric: 1. Ethos= character of the speaker, also charisma, speaker earns the audience's trust, use of body language. 2. Pathos= condition of the hearer. 3. Logos= essential bearing on political persuasion, truth. Thus, Plato's concern by definition excludes speech because it deals with emotion. These three conditions must be in play for a speech to be successful. The rhetoric contains a detailed analysis of the different human emotions and how to elicit them in a speech. Aristotle knows the speaker must be a good student of human nature to tap into human emotions. Epistçmç is scientific knowledge. Phronçsis is the capacity of the soul for using education, experience and habit all this is in the ethics. This is the same in political world so politics is not an episteme no scientific reasoning. The things that come up in politics are not deduced scientifically. In politics, humans use deliberation between several possible outcomes unlike math where there is only one correct answer. Political speech is contentious because the nature of politics is contentious. There are two circumstances in rhetoric. 1. Judicial rhetoric has to do with the past like in a court case. 2. Deliberative rhetoric has to do