Aristotle on truth and knowledge
Aristotle, like the Sophist, believed that truth and knowledge were subjective. Therefore, both varied depending on the perception of the person: what may be true for me, will not be the same as what is true for you because we are two different people with two very different perceptions and understandings.
Aristotle believed that truth and knowledge were both created by and shared through rhetoric (the art of finding the means of and language, unlike Plato, who believed that both got in the way.
Aristotle believed that truth and knowledge were both created by and shared through rhetoric (the art of finding the means of and language, unlike Plato, who believed that both got in the way.
Aristotle on Rhetoric
Aristotle defined rhetoric as "the means of discovering what is persuasive." He believed rhetoric was an art, contrary to what Plato believed. Aristotle said dialect requires rhetorical skills because “reference to another party is involved;” you must speak to someone else in order to persuade them.
Aristotle created the five cannons as a guide to creating rhetorical speech. The five cannons: invention, arrangement, style, memory, delivery. The invention is the idea the speaker gets of what he is going to say (the dialect.) The arrangement is organizing the dialect in a way that the audience is going to follow. The style is the manner in which the speaker decides to present it. Memory is essentially practicing what the speaker is going to say--note, this does not mean making speech memorable, rather, memorizing the speech.) And lastly, delivery, the way the speaker presents it.
For Aristotle, the most important factor was the audience. Why? Well, you must, at all times, consider your audience to effectively persuade them. Therefore, you must always appeal to the audience. His proofs (strategies) for appealing to the audience was using modes (rhetorical appeals.) His modes were as follows: Ethos, pathos, and logos.
Ethos is to be worth of belief; having the credibility to be in the position to be addressing a topic.
Pathos is the frame of mind; that is, appealing to the emotions of the audience.
Logos is the use of enthymemes (the way you persuade someone) and examples (syllogism); using logical points to strengthen your argument. Enthymemes are deductive and inductive arguments. Deductive arguments are going from a general example to a more specific one, such as: all dogs have tails. Duke is a dog, therefore, Duke has a tail. An inductive argument is the exact opposite, going from a specific point and generalizing it: Kitty the cat purrs, therefore, all cats purr.
Check out this youtube video, it pretty much sums up the rhetorical appeals:
Ethos is to be worth of belief; having the credibility to be in the position to be addressing a topic.
Pathos is the frame of mind; that is, appealing to the emotions of the audience.
Logos is the use of enthymemes (the way you persuade someone) and examples (syllogism); using logical points to strengthen your argument. Enthymemes are deductive and inductive arguments. Deductive arguments are going from a general example to a more specific one, such as: all dogs have tails. Duke is a dog, therefore, Duke has a tail. An inductive argument is the exact opposite, going from a specific point and generalizing it: Kitty the cat purrs, therefore, all cats purr.
Check out this youtube video, it pretty much sums up the rhetorical appeals:
There are three types of rhetoric. Epideictic, which is ceremonial (used to praise or to blame).
This is a photo of George W. Bush giving a [ceremonial] speech in honor of fallen soldiers. He is praising them, and putting the blame on the Iraqui. There's Forensic (judging something for an act that happened in the past: e.g.: deciding whether or not someone is guilty of murder. This type of rhetoric usually takes place in court.) Then there is deliberative rhetoric (future decisions, such as electing a president.) Aristotle believed that rhetoric should be used for political situations, deliberative rhetoric. The picture to the left demonstrates Romney and Obama both participating in deliberative rhetoric when they were arguing why they were the best presidential candidate. |