A Rhetorical World

Chapter two of Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students explains kairos, chreia, and proverbs and how they relate to rhetorical situation. In the book kairos is defined as special notion of space and/or time. Ancients believed kairos can be used as a mean of invention in discovering all the arguments of a rhetorical situation. Reading further about kairos I couldn’t help but think that it relates not only to rhetorical situations but everyday life. Kairos suggest the use of heuristics for rhetorical situations. Heuristics being a list of questions that help rhetors to investigate issues systematically. An example being “how urgent is the issue?” or “what interests might motivate someone to make that argument?”But do we not think this way in our everyday lives? When we make a decision about something as humans we usually analyze the situation the same way we would in a rhetorical situation. For instance, let’s say you’re trying to decide what movie to go to with a group of friends. Perhaps some in the group wants to see a horror movie and others want to see a comedy. Analyzing the situation you would think that perhaps the people who want to see the comedy are more fear prone, hence their motivation to want to see a comedy. Then there is the power dynamic. Who in the group holds more power/influence? Does the opinion of one in the group decide for the whole group? Then there is the urgency of the issue. How much do individual in the group really care about which movie they see or if they see one at all. When you think about it rhetorical situations appear every day, whether or not we are aware of them.

Later on in the chapter, chreia, a brief saying or action that makes a point was explained. I found it interesting that chreia came from the Greek word “useful”. Much like kairos, chreia appears in daily situations. Chreia suggest the use of praising a famous person’s work to show proof to an argument. Outside of rhetorical situations people are generally influenced by well known people and their opinions. For example if a famous food critic said a new restaurant had awful service and a distasteful cuisine, many would automatically think the same, instead of trying the restaurant out themselves.  Which arises the question how influenced are we by others? And are we aware of it?

Toward the end of the chapter the use of proverbs in rhetorical situations was expanded on. Proverbs use in people’s everyday’s life is evident. “The early bird catches the worm,” is one of many well known proverb that influence people not only in rhetorical situation but everyday life. Popular proverbs are taught to us at a young age to motivate and teach us important lessons in life.

Famous Sicilian rhetor Gorgias discusses in his work “Encomium of Helen” the power of language. Gorgias compares language to magic and drugs, “speech is a powerful lord; it can stop fear and banish grief and create joy and nurture pity.” Following on how rhetoric is a part of everyday life I have to agree with Gorgias. Words are the strongest tool a person can use. This is apparent in how karios, chreia, and proverbs are dependent on words. Whether we are aware of it or not we live in a rhetorical world and can use rhetorical devices not only to win an argument but to make everyday decisions.

Chapter 1 Reading: Ancient vs. Modern Rhetoric

Reading over chapter one of "Ancient Rhetoric’s for Contemporary Students" the discussion was mostly based on pointing out the difference between ancient rhetoric and modern rhetoric. While many of the points discussed in the chapter were valid I found that ancient rhetoric and modern rhetoric are still very similar. Whether people realize it or not rhetoric has been and is a part of life. As humans we almost can't help but engage in rhetoric.

One of the differences pointed out between ancient and modern rhetoric was that ancient rhetors did not value factual proof or testimony, while modern rhetoric relies heavily on facts to win an argument. Ancients rhetors were said to "invent" their arguments versus searching for them the way modern rhetors do. Ancient rhetors also believed that opinions were held by entire communities, not independent people and that facts are experienced based. Now, while modern rhetoric does rely heavily on facts, do people’s opinions not become their own facts? Personally I still believe opinions are community based (at least in smaller communities). People from the same place will not have the same opinion one-hundred percent of the time, but often their values are very similar. So it is difficult to say that ancient and modern rhetoric are that different.

An important topic discussed in the text was the use of “ethos, pathos, and logos”, meaning “ethical, practical, and logical” thought/argumentation. This factor of rhetoric is something that cannot be denied is used in both ancient and modern rhetoric. Another way to think of “ethical, practical, and logical” proofs is as “opinions (values), judgment, and fact”. Aristotle discriminated against these kinds of rhetorical proofs, but I believe they are a crucial factor to a persons rhetoric. A persons values affect how they perceive others and situations, “a person’s logos is their identity” (pg. 22). I don’t think people can help but include their values, known facts and perceptions into their rhetorical arguments.

            Another discussion included in the chapter was the power of language. The book pointed out that ancient rhetors were skeptical of language, and thought of it as “transparent”. The ancients respected that power of words on how they could bring people together and force action. The power of words is still true in modern rhetoric. It is true that modern rhetors don’t generally question if. For example is a tree is actually a “tree” just because we call it a tree? Modern rhetors understand the way ancient rhetors do, that words are an invention by humans to make it easier to communicate with one another, and to give meaning to things. Language is one of the bases of human life and its impact is relatively the same between ancient and modern rhetoric.  One thing the chapter agreed was similar between ancient and modern rhetoric was to practice. Ancients didn’t believe in the product of rhetoric but in the activity of doing it. Modern rhetoric practice tends to look more like “busy-work” because today’s society thinks of writing as a product. Modern rhetoric that doesn’t end in a product could be considered “babbling”. Despite the difference of how rhetoric is practiced the bottom line is that to study rhetoric practicing is the key.                                                                                                                             

         It is true that there are large differences between ancient and modern rhetoric. It is difficult to say how an ancient rhetor and a modern rhetor would act if they were presented in a situation together. Despite the large difference, I believe there are still similarities between the two rhetoric’s.