Rhetoric was a significant part of education in Western, and it can be traced back to the ancient Greece until the late nineteenth century in which public speakers, as well as writers, were taught to persuade their audience to action with arguments (Metzger, 1997). A profound interest in the rhetoric study started increasing at the turn of the twentieth century and as such, various universities and colleges developed department for speech and rhetoric. Additionally, there were creations of professional agencies at the national and the international level. Some theorists in the modern world have the belief that it was essential to restore the rhetorical study’s interest. Such was because there is a renewed significance of persuasion and language in the increasingly submissive twentieth century’s environment and through the twenty-first century. The modern theorists also believe in the essentiality of restoring the rhetorical study’s interest because the media spotlight is on the broad analyses and differences of the political rhetoric as well as its results. The development of marketing and mass media that include telegraphy, film, radio, and photography makes rhetoric remarkably conveyed in the lives of people.
Despite the rhetoric’s legacy as an ethical way of addressing one’s points of view, it has also taken on some unenthusiastic undertones. For a long period of time, generations have forgotten rhetoric’s real meaning, and they somehow allude to the fact that the word is untrustworthy and misleading (Brooke, 1997). Presently, mass media greatly utilizes rhetoric in a manner that is derogatory especially when related to politicians and public policies.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Rhetoric as a methodological study was invented by a team of educators, advocates, and orators known as Sophists. Such a team came up with paradoxes that were meant to surprise their audiences, and also to provoke inquiry and debate (Biesecker & Lucaites, 2009). The outlook of sophists concerning rhetoric might have been the reason behind the misunderstanding of the meaning of rhetoric in the world. They observed rhetoric as a channel through which pleasure with a government could be united. Sophists’ belief was that words had the capability of medicating the audience. The sophists’ period was the time in which rhetoric was progressively a more expressive need as a skill, though there was a developed pessimistic nuance as the criticisms of Plato became popular. The most backward rhetoric paradigm as an offensive word can be traced back to Plato and his points of view concerning the sophists. Plato being a renowned student of Socrates, he regularly described Sophists as a writer who had great skills but made the most deceptive language techniques so as to influence and persuade the listeners. His assumption on Sophism which is emphasized in the Isocrates’ writings was founded on selfishness, dishonesty, and anxiety for justice. Sophists made the worst scenarios to look better by manipulating speech.
Sophism as a term carries on preserving the unconstructive reputation in the present society. Classical rhetoric analysts define sophism as a disparaging term for the false arguments that are carefully created with the intention of deceiving the listener (Metzger, 1997). Sophism is also presently used in giving the description of rhetorical scenarios in which emotional needs comes first over the logical needs. It is imperative to note that rhetoric and sophism have been connected in various ways in the contemporary era as already mentioned in this paragraph.
The classical model is dependable on the assumption concerning knowledge as well as the world that is no longer reasonable. The classical speaker could depend on an ordinary cultural legacy as well as on a philosophy that calculated his capability to personify the model of such an ordinary culture (Zappen, 2005). The difference between modern and classical rhetoric rests on the association between world and self. Inhabiting a universe is like possessing the images that show the extent to which things are above the reach of people’s instant experience. Such images can have repercussions in the manner in which a person experiences the immediate which produces values which make assertions on one’s life conduct. Modern rhetoric influences a turnaround of the association that the classical tradition represents. Instead of other people’s persuasion to think and act by referring to a culture that is shared, rhetoric becomes the development of competing and incomplete cultures by monadic selves.
As Christianity started to spread out in the Middle Ages after the collapse of the Roman Empire, the global society began to associate the rhetoric as fancy and expressive though it did not meet the demands of the general idea or knowledge (Brooke, 1997). The church did not believe in expressiveness which was a critical speech and communication aspect. Rhetoric was reduced and viewed pejoratively by Christian.
The reputation of rhetoric had been rejuvenated in the sixteenth century, though some famous scholars carried on to pass judgment on rhetoric. Such scholars questioned rhetoric by elaborating that rhetoric was a major type of verbal improvement and also as a result of little upshot (Zappen, 2005). As scholar such as Peter Ramus questioned rhetoric and praised dialectic, the theoretical influence of rhetoric was lost. However, it was later viewed as a tool of speech that was more of pessimistic and stylistic. Ramus went further to reiterate in his scheme of ideas that the rhetoric’s five components no longer existed within the common rhetoric heading. Instead, memory, delivery, and style were the components that remained for rhetoric whereas disposition and invention were found to fall in the dialectic heading. Some scholars have also argued that language was separated from thought by Ramus through the creation of an education replica in which reason and speech are separate things. As such, language was no longer seen as the foundation of a form of skills that an educated person has mastered, but rather as an independent tool for conveying other disciplines’ findings.
Aristotle was another Greek philosopher who contributed enormously to the creation of the Western thinking concerning rhetoric. He was Plato’s student who eminently set into the world an extended discourse on rhetoric that researchers still consider using in the present world. One of essential contributions of the approach of Aristotle was that he observed rhetoric as part of the vital pillars of philosophy, together with dialectic and logic (Biesecker & Lucaites, 2009). Aristotle asserts in the rhetoric’s word that rhetoric is the complement of dialectic. Aristotle also writes that logic is the philosophy’s field that is concerned with the thinking ways which aims at reaching the scientific reassurance. On the other hand, rhetoric and dialectic are concerned with the option, and thus is the area of philosophy that best suits the affairs of people. Dialectic is a tool for hypothetical debate as it forms a channel through which the audience can evaluate knowledge that is credible with the purpose of learning. Conversely, rhetoric is a toll for a levelheaded debate in which an individual takes the chance to convince an audience through the application of dependable knowledge with the aim of resolving practical matters. Both rhetoric and dialect form an association for a persuasion technique that is derived from knowledge, but not playing on feeling.
Scholars of the modern world focus on the reasons why rhetoric has taken on a derogatory connotation. They assume that there is a predisposition to forget the past of rhetoric which has played a critical role in destroying the democracy by labeling the speech of politicians as deceptive, as well as the unsuccessful telling of the public to comprehend and use good speech (Zappen, 2005). The modern scholars dispute the fact that the texts and electronic words model has a normal prospective to promote human thinking and democratic speech. However, such arguments for a digital age also have oppositions as there is discernment that electronic texts have no unenviable distinctions between cultures that are low and high, pure usage and commercial, auditory or visual stimulus, alphabetic or iconic information. Research indicate that Electronic Word which presents words via a textual print display that is static is rapidly being replaced by the computer screen’s textual types that are more fluid. The Electronic Word is speedily changing the individuals’ present literacy definition. The textual forms like hypertext, network exchanges, and e-mail are altering the intellectual perception that people have to the Western rhetoric’s origin.
It can be imagined that the electronic prose is moving back to the oral rhetoric world where the gestural symmetries were allowed, and the sound was universal. Any writing style by the nature of expression or denial tensions that animate and develop it swings forth and back between oral permissiveness and literary self denial, but the text that is electrically generated does well self-consciously by the impulsive nature of the surface that is written. An impulsive surface attracts people to intensify, but not to subdue the oscillation. It also attracts people to make oscillation more self-conscious. Additionally, while some people may feel as though the electronic explosion of inert textual structures are in place to mark the end of the Western education as the linear print structures demonstrate, modern scholars believe that it does the opposite. They believe that such electronic explosions are same to any other oscillation that the thinking of Western always displays.
Reflecting on populism versus the internal elitism tension that is inbuilt in discrete logical and resistance forms of postmodern theory, the digital rhetoric epitomizes an uncertain oscillation between aesthetic and critical approaches to a hypertext (Porter, 2009). On the other hand, the digital rhetoric also exemplifies a democratic electronic media appreciation which is more popular as well as a hypermedia. Many of the hypermedia critics and theorists maintain their privileged critical and literal assumptions that undermine the claimed relations to the electronic media’s cultural extensions that are popular. Such is possible because of the subjective and the opposing ways in which a model of hypermedia which does lots of roles alternates between the reading act and focusing on interactive descriptions that have been designed as a vital unintentional procedure. Additionally, hypermedia critics and theorists maintain their privileged critical and literal assumptions by reducing human communication and language to the expression of distinct information and images that support underlying conflicts between the new and famous electronic culture and print age instances of the use of language (Porter, 2009). The integration of the concept of hypertext into a hypermedia electronic literacy framework shows a lot than giving the description of hypermedia as an extension of hypertext to encompass the effects of electronic multimedia like the graphics and the sounds that are digitized. Postmodern literacy meaning models as a play of open-ended stories and contingent product, reader-response, and language games were used in hypothesizing about hypertext. Such reception, privileged texuality models, and aesthetic procedures were implicitly in bad terms with the semiotic move to relocate from the intricate and subtle textual allusions of the narratives that were open-ended. The open-ended stories were mediated as the verbal use of language to encompass the electronic media that replaced rhetoric so as to satisfy the desire and memory of humans.
The assumptions of the residual print of convergence between the vital theories of postmodern and the hypermedia electronic illiteracy model is efficiently evaluated in the manner in which hypertext persuades readers and writers to consciously work with their deconstruction’s complicity with text construction. That is to mean that hypertext will efficiently strengthen the theories of postmodernism of the theorists like Derrida, Barthes, and Baudrillard.
The twentieth century comes about as possibly the most thrilling era in which to learn about rhetoric since the Middle Age. The era comes with the start of what is normally called the New Rhetoric which is the rediscovery of the importance of the epistemology of rhetoric as well as the essential obligation of argument and persuasion in humans’ daily lives. I.A Richards is one of the most influential individuals who has immensely contributed to the New Rhetoric (Porter, 2009). His work on metaphor related rhetoric to the literary studies. Rhetoric was used as a tool for teaching students the various techniques for writing essays while other regions used it as a persuasive tool during the Middle Ages. Rhetoric is broadly used in technical writing, politics, and in business. For instance, the style and structure of speeches, memos, letters, and other forms of documents follow the standards of rhetoric. The old version of rhetoric dealt specifically with the content and structure of a presentation or an essay. The new rhetoric has new limits. It encompasses sociology and philosophy. It no longer deals with good speeches and essays, but how to identify communication and how it influences lives of individuals. Rhetoric received a powerful and a new field of operation as a result of the invention of the World Wide Web (WWW). The principles of rhetoric make it easier to carry out various forms of Web projects.
The five sections of the classical concept that include style, delivery, memory, arrangement, and invention provide avenues through which people begin to mediate on how to use the ideas of rhetoric in writing during the twenty-first century. It is significant to note that literacy has gone through various changes starting from the oral work to writing, to printing, and it is still likely to go through lots of changes in ways that are still not imaginable. It is without a doubt that use of computers will colossally impact the rhetoric’s future, literacy, and composition classes.
Creating documents of hypertext on the World Wide Web provides lots of freedom. The most surprising difference in a document that is electronic is the knowledge to provide fairly immediate access to the sources that a person assembles during the process of the invention (Brooke, 1997). An individual has to provide links for hypertext that directly lead to the material that he uses in supporting his arguments if such a person wants to fully utilize the hypertext’s capabilities. Making available the links to such a material engages the audience in the process of the invention as the audience will also get access to the materials that were used and confirmed the legitimacy of the evidence. Finding the information that supports the work is greatly enhanced by search engines that can assist a person in exploring the Web, and trace the relevant and useful evidence that supports the presentation. Additionally, lots of web sites give use the permission to use their contents that are digitized.
It is not easy to distinguish the start, middle, or an end of a document that if electronically produced. Therefore, establishing an arrangement that is suitable for a person’s electronic document relies on his creativity. An emotional appeal that is powerful to the audience will depend on one’s innovative organization and the style that the person applies (Porter, 2009). Gorgias acknowledged the power of persuasion of atypical applications of languages, as well as the manner in which meanings and alterations in the normal order had effects on the audience. In the present electronic era, insights of Gorgias still remain effective though with expended submissions. Using WWW to write documents develops a cyberspace or a wholly new world that is open to new methods of expression as well as meaning. A figure of speech which is an example of an image, can converse meaning and provide a person with a principle of rhetoric. The same can apply to color which also converses meaning just like a trope. Color and image must suit the circumstance for them to show purpose.
Memory is another important aspect of the rhetorical standard. Men were always called upon in assemblies and courts during the ancient times so as to deliver speeches without the assistance of a written document (Biesecker & Lucaites, 2009). The Romans and Greeks improvised an intricate system of memory that gave them the opportunity to deliver speeches in the exact manner they were written. The Web’s memories have a different meaning. Most individuals consider its meaning as the ability of readers to remember the places they are in and the places they have been while surfing the net.
In the ancient, persuasive skills were important in the effective delivery of speech as written texts were to be communicated verbally. The delivery method was to match with styles as that was one of the main ways in which orators could remain relevant to the audience (Zappen, 2005). However, in the world of hypertext, delivering a speech does not come with lots of stress like arranging for a venue though there are obstacles that such type of delivery pauses. The author of the speech is not certain about the person who will read or listen to his speech, nor are they sure that the audience will understand the concept of the speech. The documents that authors generate are used by browsers that read the code of HTML for presentation on the monitor since every browser retains various features. As such, successful delivery of the speech is dependent on producing documents that foretell the disparities among browsers.
Rhetoric distorted the people’s insight for the truth. It all depends on the writers’ or the speakers’ ability to captivate the audience effectively and show that he means the truth through the use of his compelling reasoning, style that is detailed as well as credibility (Biesecker & Lucaites, 2009). The technological era has adversely changed the theories of rhetoric without modification to the meaning of rhetoric taking effect. Media is used in big measure to persuade buyers to buy ideas, services, goods, or anything that businesses produce. Rhetoric is used to convince people of the truth of the issues that media through technology persuades people to use. The theories of rhetoric are revealed in the technologically produced documents in today’s publishing and writing as a tool for persuasion. Conversely, rhetoric is currently used as a study on why and how humans communicate as well as the things that they can learn from the communication techniques, but not as an important humanist study of content and structure.
References
Biesecker, B., A., & Lucaites, J., L. (2009). Rhetoric, materiality, & politics . New York: Peter Lang.
Brooke, C., G. (1997). The fate of rhetoric in an electronic age. Enculturation. Retrieved from http://enculturation.net/1_1/brooke.html
Metzger, D. (1997). Saul/Paul and the promise of technological reforms. Enculturation. Retrieved from http://enculturation.net/1_1/metzger.html
Porter, J., E. (2009). Recovering delivery for digital rhetoric. Computers and Composition, 26( 4), 207-224. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2009.09.004
Zappen, J., P. (2005). Digital rhetoric: Toward an integrated theory. Technical Communication Quarterly, 14 (3), 319-325. Retrieved from http://gossettphd.org/library/zappen_digirhet.pdf
