Ein Blog

On page one of Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric Foss notes that, for purposes of the book, "our definition of rhetoric features the use of symbols by humans" (Foss 1). To me this says that by creating, communicating, or expressing in any form a symbol, you're involved in rhetorical process. This brings up a whole slew of what-ifs however, as it is an extremely broad definition. For one, what if the presenter does not intend a symbol that an audience decides lies within the communication. In the opposite case, what if the audience doesn’t see a symbol the presenter was directly trying to imply. To me, both cases are still using rhetoric, but the end result could be different in both cases.

I use thousands of symbols every day, but to me in order for them to be perceived as rhetorical they have to imply something beyond the basic part of communication. As far as I understand, words within the English language would be symbols; when I add a large amount of sarcasm and undertone of implied meaning they become rhetorical. Rhetoric doesn’t have to have a negative connotation either, just something beyond what the normal symbol would be considered to an audience. At least that’s how I understand it, and would explain Foss’ definition.

The first Google result I chose to use was from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, which states that rhetoric is "the art of speaking or writing effectively" (Merriam-Webster). To me that means simply communicating well. I don't think that's anything close to the definition of Rhetoric though, as discussed in class today. "Effectively" will differ from audience to audience, or even within the same group of listeners. You can still be communicating rhetorically and have some not understand, in my opinion.

The second Google result I chose to use was from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, who notes that Aristotle's (of Greek fame) definition of a rhetorical person is a "rhetorician," that is "someone who is always able to see what is persuasive" (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). While this technically defines someone who practices rhetoric, I think the basis of the definition is more on point with my opinion of rhetoric. This would be communication with persuasion of some kind.

Random Google Image Search for the word of the day: Rhetoric

Source (http://www.abc.net.au/)

Empty Rhetoric is still rhetoric?

Foss, Sonja A.. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. 3rd. Waveland Press, Inc.,