Just as the vidcast and the video imply above, rhetoric can only relate to the persuasive qualities of language. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle strongly influenced the way people traditionally viewed rhetoric. Aristotle defined rhetoric as “an ability to see in each case the means of persuasion available” (Aristotle Rhetoric I.1.2, Kennedy 37). Since then, the definition of Aristotle`s rhetoric has been reduced in many situations to simply meaning “conviction.” At best, this simplification of rhetoric has led to a long tradition that people associate rhetoric with politicians, lawyers or other professions known to speak convincingly. In the worst case, the simplification of rhetoric has led people to think that rhetoric is just something that manipulators use to get what they want (usually regardless of moral or ethical concerns). However, over the past century, the academic definition and use of “rhetoric” have evolved to include all situations in which people consciously communicate. In short, individuals tend to perceive and understand almost everything between others (this difference naturally varies to a lesser extent or more depending on the situation). This broader perception has led a number of contemporary rhetorical philosophers to assert that rhetoric is more than just a persuasive work. Instead of merely persuading, rhetoric is the series of methods by which people identify with each other – to encourage each other to understand things from each other`s point of view (see Burke 25). From interpersonal relations to international peace treaties, the ability to understand or change the perspective of another is one of the most important capabilities available to human beings.
This is why understanding the rhetoric about “identification” helps us to better communicate and assess all of these situations. Listening to the podcasts above and watching the video above should help anyone who uses this resource to better understand the basics of rhetoric and rhetorical situations. Praeteritio (Paraleipsis): omission feigned for rhetorical effect. And a word or phrase can be a rhetorical accent in one context, and in another context, it can serve another function, legitimate or not so legitimate. The absolute word is an example. (You can expect a blog post soon above absolutely.) strictly: the company guarantees the payment of the bonds guaranteed strictly in accordance with the terms of this agreement and obligations. Anadiplosis: (“doubly backwards”) the rhetorical repetition of one or more words; in particular, a word that terminates a clause at the beginning of the next.