We are going to be studying rhetoric. What on earth does that even mean? Here is what Webster's says: "The art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing". Our sub-focus is eloquence and philosophy within various civilizations and how knowledge was passed down through this medium.
Rhetoric varies from civilization to civilization and as such, has different values associated with it. I read part of an article that explains some of these differences. I am still trying to wrap my mind around the subject matter, but I will do my best to explain coherently some of the things that I learned. In rhetoric, the speaker appeals to three different principles: ethos, pathos, and logos. In Western rhetoric, most appeal to ethos, trying to appear as a person of good will and good character. If one can do that, you have a much greater chance of convincing your audience of your position. Western thought says you can win a debate and sway people to believe your side of the issue. In Confucian thought and rhetoric, there is much more of a peaceful feeling. In ancient China, the rhetoric would persuade through values such as "rectitude, sincerity, and consideration and respectfulness". Here is a great quote from the source that illustrates this point perfectly. "Argumentation is a process that involves not two opponents that are engaged in a contest to determine a victor but a co- operative enterprise between concerned and responsible parties that are attempting to arrive at some conclusion". 
How different is that from what we see in our world today? Everyone is out to get their piece of the pie and nothing else. As long as we get what we want, the world can keep turning. Confucian thought and rhetoric differs dramatically from that. I think we could have a good discussion as a group about the different styles of rhetoric between our various civilizations.I feel that we can even see this today. The Asian cultures are very hospitable and peaceful. We in the West can be set in our ways and determined to make others believe the same. It was interesting to me to learn about some of these differences in thought and rhetoric. I will continue to research the rhetoric of ancient China and you can bet that I will have more to add!
Source
I wonder whether we will see patterns in the relationship between the rhetorical styles and cultural values of each of our civilizations...
ReplyDeleteThe interesting thing for me is that rhetoric doesn't strictly have to be oral knowledge, though it usually is in that form - it can be written too, in some cases. Which should be helpful for our research purposes!
ReplyDeleteSo excited to see what everyone was assigned! I'm sure there will be a huge relationship between the language and cultural values!
ReplyDeleteYep there are always connections between the linguistic foundation of a culture and the way they use their rhetoric to persuade others of their position. I think we use this a lot in today's business world through speech with all our canniving and groveling to get a certain deal closed etc.
ReplyDeleteAlthough my Dad's a lawyer, I've really never had any idea what rhetoric means. Nevertheless, every time I think of rhetoric, I not only think of lawyers but of Aristotle as well. He wrote Rhetoric in the fourth century, which discusses the skill, the art of persuasion. I wonder, are people are losing this skill in today's digital age? What effects could it have on society and how we view and transmit knowledge?
ReplyDeleteI think it definitely makes it harder to express yourself in person when you're more used to, say, texting.
ReplyDelete