Possible Topic for Discussion: Rhetoric in Basic Education

Why does education today neglect rhetoric? Or why is it not overtly a part of basic education requirements? Most students have heard of or even played around with ethos, pathos, and logos, but why is it amiss in education? Is it perhaps because the concepts are too challenging to teach to students lower than the university level? We use rhetoric everyday, whether appropriately or not and shouldn't all students be responsible for some basic level of understanding even in order to communicate and argue effectively in their own lives?

11-18 Post

Postmodernism’s origins revolved around the strategic readings of Marx and Freud along with global movements and events.  Bakhtin’s work in ethics and literary theory and emphasis on moral philosophy were reminiscent of earlier rhetoricians, such as Plato and Aristotle.  He focused on ethics and aesthetics in regard to the uniqueness of the self and the inability to remain neutral on immoral or unethical subjects or matters of work.  His three schematic models of the human psyche were used in order to develop a sense of identity.  His idea that identity is not something that belongs merely to the individual, and rather belongs to a group as a whole is very similar to the concept that emotion and personal feeling should be removed from and argument, as no one person can have property over that emotion or take personal offense when another disagrees with them because argument is not personal.  Perhaps identity is not personal either, and if that and the previous of emotions are meant to be devoid in a person’s argument, statement, or being then how ethically does that make sense? How does one keep their moral compass aligned when they cannot possess their own identity and are not mean to feel anything when they are argued against or proven wrong? We like to think that we can stand above the emotion and be selfless and emotionless when people refute our arguments, but is it not human nature to disagree simply for the fact that your opinion is wrong and someone else’s is right—especially if yours is proven false, invalid, or lackluster? Identity can be regarded as that which is socially assigned to each of us, or the hat we choose to wear based on what society offers us, so if we remove that hat and there’s no sense of identity is there also no sense of self? And if there is no identity and no self then how are we meant to take a stance and create and support our own arguments?

Maria W. Stewart’s upbringing of education and religion allowed her to have a very interesting understanding about inalienable rights that was ahead of her time, especially for women to have.  Her accessibility to books, and tendency for independent thought was remarkable as it allowed for her the capacity to fight for civil rights.  In her lecture she stated that just as white people regardless of their gender did not want to be laborers, and how could they even fathom a life of servitude.  This comparison among many others along with her opinion of slavery as a horror and she even claimed her knowledge and understanding of religion to be useful in backing up her claims.  When conveying her opinions Maria W. Stewart had to put a lot of emphasis on her style, and her ability to connect with her audience, especially because of her gender, and especially because of the group of people that she was advocating for.

On the other side, Fredrick Douglass’ understanding of his African American society, hardships and discrimination, along with his past in slavery very influential in his writings about slavery and the like.  This ethos is successful for Douglass for his argument to provide an understanding of the treatment of slaves.  His emphasis of freedom and basic principles were revolutionary not only because of their content, but also because of the methods by which those ideas were relayed as well as who they were coming from.  The details of what travesties occurred to slaves was stylistically portrayed in a very shocking and real way. 

In wrapping up the ARCS text the ideas of composition, delivery and memory are important to a rhetorician’s understanding of how to properly use rhetoric in order to convince an audience.   The comparison between spoken discourse and written composition has drastically changed since ancient times as it used to “not [be] fashionable to do one’s own writing,” but today a person is intellectually measured by their ability to write, and to write well.  However, the rhetors did believe in the importance of composing texts that were stylistically appealing, with correctness, clarity, appropriateness, and kairos in order to convey their arguments most effectively to their audience.  Today we use these same conventions, and a writer’s prowess is measures against these tools and knowledge of them. 

Similarly delivery of written discourse was imperative to master.  They focused on gestures, and all nonverbal communication to improve their delivery and to even help with memory.  The importance placed on memory was much different than it is today, we look at memorization as a rare form of proficiency and with our media center world and the accessibility to information, people generally do not take it upon themselves to memorize facts; whereas memorization was more common that writing in the past.  This change is indicative of human development and dependency, and as Vico claimed that all knowledge is based on argument and conviction so too is oral rhetoric dependent on memorization and a complete understanding of the topic.  Written arguments stop once the piece is published, shared or reviewed, often the writer is not obligated to respond to their original thoughts after the fact, but once a speech is spoken their writer is not longer afforded the luxury of distance from his argument, but rather he is bound in the moment, submissive to the kairos and must respond accordingly to possible mishaps, changes, forgetfulness, and audience disagreement. 

My Strengths and Weaknesses:

• I am a very good team player
• I am organized, punctual, and positive
• I can learn any program, it might take a couple tries but once I get the hang of something I can do it. 
• I am comfortable with photoshop and basic html
• I am not good with videos or complicated web design

The Arrangement

The importance of arrangement by selecting the arguments to be used and arranging these in an order that was clear and persuasive, depends on the rhetorical situation, and making the use of kairos leads to the possibility of achieving an advantage.  Arrangement depends in large part on the rhetorical situation. It relates to Madeleine de Scudery and how the salons were a place where arrangement was everything, because if you weren’t eloquent and knowledgeable you wouldn’t be successful. You need to arrange your points as well, you can’t end on a weak point, but you don’t want to start off weak either.  You have to think about what the best way for the audience to experience your argument.  Kairos can viewed as a time and place for everything, and the order in which you put your points, and sometimes you can have weaker points in the beginning, but holistically its still needs to remain strong throughout.  In an aural environment we have to think about the attention span of the audience and what it will take for their attention to be captivated.  Have to figure out what you’re going to do in the beginning, and when it comes to the written word, you have to give the so what.  When writing I try to start with the “why should I care” question, then end with the “so what”.

10.21 Follow Up

What people take from a moment is what matters, not what people intentionally put in a text.  Even in judicial terms, when deciding how to interpret the constitution, the literally versus the adaptability to what is going on today.  We perforce and there’s a tension about how to interpret the text.  Once text is written down it cannot be changed.  Things cannot change as easily, not fluid with the society because once you write them down.  If we take the Bible seriously as exact word for word and even other religious text there are many things that are supposed to be taken verbatim and the fact that something was accepted at one point in time is what we all have to deal with.  Some things might seem ridiculous especially the further removed we are in time and culture from what happened. A text cannot make a judgment about its audience (can help or harm) when we don’t know what a text means, we can’t interpret it then we call on the author, but now if we don’t understand something that was written too long ago, we can’t do that.  The text has a permanence that outlives even the life of the author. 

My notion of extrinsic proofs evolved after reading this chapter because I now understand the importance that our culture places on ideas such as testimony and the eye witness.  You want to cite authority that is universally recognized.