Essay 2: How print has affected rhetoric

The Beneficial Effects of Print on Rhetoric

Francis Bacon said, “We should not force, effect, and consequences of inventions which are nowhere more conspicuous then in those three which were unknown to the ancients, namely, printing, gunpowder, and the compass. For these three have changed the appearance and state of the whole world…” (Eisenstein 43). It is apparent from Francis Bacon’s statement that he considered there to be consequences to advancements in technologies, one of these being print. This can be more closely examined in regards to the effects of print on rhetoric. Now, while there have been negative effects to the invention of print on rhetoric, the benefits greatly outweigh them. The invention of print was able to expand rhetoric to the masses, gave availability for the formation of new opinions of rhetoric, and created a larger shared network of cultural definitions of logos, ethos, and pathos. These benefits have overtime formed the modern rhetoric that is widely available to those who wish to study it.

            To fully understand the beneficial effect of print on rhetoric the negatives must first be addressed. One downfall of the effects of print on rhetoric was the change of delivery by the rhetoricians. Before the invention of print, or even writing, a rhetorician often created their speeches in the moment of delivery. This gave opportunity for the rhetorician to play on the emotional appeals of the audience and to expose their passion in the topic. With print, rhetoricians lost their passion in their argument, making for deliveries that can sometimes seem dry or boring.  However, the availability of print has allowed rhetoricians to examine their audience more closely; focusing on the audience environment, opinions, and culture definitions. By doing this a rhetorician is able to gather evidence that will seem relevant to their audience and better persuade the audience to the rhetorician’s argument.

            Another unfortunate negative effect from print on rhetoric is the concept of product over activity. Ancient rhetoricians were not focused on the product of their rhetorical speeches but the activity itself (Crowley and Hawhee 19). Before the invention of print, rhetors believed highly in the power of language and the situations which allow rhetorical arguments to arise (Crowley and Hawhee 21). Rhetoric was a way to achieve knowledge and also a past time.

The invention of print changed the focus of rhetoric to the overall product. This was due heavily on prints need to create a profit. Elizabeth Eisenstein stated in her book The Printing Press as an Agent of Change that there was a satisfaction for printers in making money for themselves while enhancing the reputation of the author (Eisenstein 17). This is another aspect of the idea of profit over activity. Print allowed rhetoricians to be able to sell their work, something ancient rhetoricians were unable to do. This changed the view of rhetoric largely, because many rhetoricians wrote arguments that agreed with the large opinions of society in order to make a profit. This is an unfortunate cost of the invention of print, but in a capitalist society it was bound to occur eventually, whether through print or by other means. Despite this negative, there are many benefits given to rhetoric from the invention of print.

            One of the largest advantages of print was the availability of expansion it gave to rhetoric. Print allowed people from all parts of the world to be exposed to rhetoric. This increased literacy and education (Kreis). Before the invention of print, rhetoric was limited to being taught to lawyers, medical professionals, and politicians (Bizzell and Herzberg 556). The rapid availability print gave to rhetoric allowed people of all classes and professions to have the opportunity to study rhetoric. The expansion of rhetoric allowed more people to have understanding of the practices of rhetoric, which led to questions against the church and government (Bizzell and Herzberg 557). The more people understood rhetorical techniques, the less people were manipulated by politicians and religion. 

Eisenstein states in her text that, “the more printed materials accumulate, the more we are inclined to overlook them in favor of more recent, less familiar media” (Eisenstein 17). I however do not believe this is true. The expansion of rhetoric led to an increased interest in the studies of ancient rhetoricians. Especially in the Renaissance era, that was known as the “information revolution” (Kreis).   This is evident from the famous Renaissance rhetorician Francesco Petrarch who advocated Cicero’s concepts of humanitas (674). Petrarch admired Cicero for his statement that “all men should combine literary art, moral philosophy and civic responsibility to rhetoric” (Bizzell and Herzberg 566). This was a concept that was adopted by many including the rhetorician Peter Ramus who created a simplified version of rhetoric to be taught more easily. Ramus separated rhetoric, that he referred to as philosophy, into ten spheres of topics, and created an arrangement that followed a structure of syllogism (Bizzell and Herzberg 674). This allowed many to easily adopt rhetoric techniques into their everyday lives as Ramus’s methods “simplified as it universalized”(Bizzell and Herzberg 675), which further expanded rhetoric.

With the increased expansion of rhetoric, the opportunity for new rhetorical techniques and opinions emerged from print. As mention previously, the renaissance rhetorician Peter Ramus created a simplified form of rhetoric that was meant for the use of the common person, not for the highly educated aristocrats it had been previously secluded to. Many adopted Ramus rhetorical style and were able to apply it to their own rhetorical ideas. Printing also prevented the further corruption of texts that occurs from hand copying (Kreis). Before the invention of print it was common for a rhetoricians work to be altered by the person copying it, either by purpose or accident. Changes in a rhetor’s work from hand copying could be departmental to the rhetorician as it could alter their opinions perceived by their audience. Printing made it possible for a rhetorician’s original work to be available to all.

 Comparisons were then able to be made, as all scholars examined the same piece of work. This opportunity to share opinions and create new rhetorical techniques opened the door for many individuals striving to pursue knowledge of rhetoric’s, including women.  Before the invention of print, rhetoric was primarily secluded to men. Female rhetoricians such as Aspasia, Diotima, or Hortensia existed, but their work was often overlooked in favor of male rhetoricians. The expansion of rhetoric brought by print opened the doors for female rhetoricians, which brought about new views of rhetoric that had not been explored before. One example is Laura Cereta, an Italian humanist of the 15^th century who fought for women’s right to education and against the oppression of married women (Haraguchi). Cereta attacked her male counter-parts by composing Latin letters in the form of orations and invectives, which forced both men and women to consider the role of the women in society (Haraguchi). This called attention to long standing cultural norms. Like many other rhetoricians after the emergence of print, Cereta forced society to create new cultural definitions of logos, ethos, and pathos that has led to the current modern version of rhetoric we have today.

Overtime cultural definitions change to fit the current needs and opinions of the people. Print escalated the need to create a large scale network of shared cultural norms, which include norms in regards to rhetoric of logos, ethos, and pathos. Logos, or logical proofs referring to reason. In thinking of logos, one must acknowledge the premise of the argument, a premise being a statement supposed or assumed before the argument (Crowley and Hawhee 159). If the premise is widely shared, which can be done through the use of print, than it is easier for the rhetorician to make their argument. For instance if a rhetorician uses the premise all cats are mammals, then the rhetorician would be able to argue that a jaguar is part of the feline family because feline’s are mammals. This is similar for ethos, or ethical proofs and pathos, or pathetic proofs. Through the use of print, society at large can share cultural norms that rhetoricians can use as evidence for their arguments. This can be useful especially when trying to unify an organization or even a country.

It is true the invention of print brought about negative aspects to rhetoric such as style delivery and the concept of product over activity. However, the benefits print has brought to rhetoric greatly outweigh the negatives. Print has expanded the availability of rhetoric, which has led to the formation of new opinions, and led to a shared network of rhetorical cultural norms. This has greatly advanced the literacy and education of society. Rhetoric before the invention of print was limited to primarily male aristocrats. The invention of print has allowed rhetoric to be available to all classes, genders and professions, which can clearly only be beneficial.

Extrinsic Proofs

In chapter eight of Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students the focus of the chapter was on extrinsic proofs. It was first explained that Aristotle had divided proofs into two categories: intrinsic, meaning invented by the rhetor, and extrinsic, meaning found in rhetorical situations. The bases of a extrinsic proof was further explained as the chapter continued. Extrinsic proofs are classified as laws, rumors, maxims, documents, oaths and testimonies of authorities or witnesses. The ancient rhetor Quintilian believed extrinsic proofs are “situated”, which Cicero believed all extrinsic proofs rely chiefly on the authority granted by the community to those who make them. All ancient rhetor’s however had concerns on the reliability of extrinsic proofs. This was mainly focused on written documents. The issue with the reliability of written documents for ancient rhetor’s was that it was not always clear who the author was. Also a written document is central to cultures definitions. This distrust of the written document made ancient rhetor’s find evidence primarily in testimonies, which was categorized in to two types: community authorities and proximate authorities. Community authorities are those whose words or actions have earned them respect within a given community; or in other words an expert on a certain subject. Proximate authorities are those who statements are considered reliable because the person was physically present for the event. The reliability of the proximate authority is not about the persons wisdom the way community authorities is, but about their presence to the event. Therefore the proximate authority witness must pass four tests to determine the worth of their testimony. The first test is to note if the witness is in a position to observe the events in question. The second is to inspect the conditions such that the witness can adequately perceive the event. The third is to examine the witness state of mind, making sure the witness it conducive to accurate observation and reporting. The final test is to understand that the testimony offered by the proximate witness is more valuable than evidence offered by someone who was not present at the event. Along with using testimonies as evidence for extrinsic proofs, data, thesis and laws can also be used, but the information collected from these categories of evidence must be examined closely for their reliability. Overall ancient rhetor’s believed that extrinsic proofs were situated to a argument or event. They believed in many forms of evidence of extrinsic proofs that are still used today by modern rhetor’s.

Renaissance Rhetoric

The Renaissance was a time of new culture and knowledge. Known as the time of “rebirth”, many at the time of the Renaissance strived to broaden their horizons by learning more. Before it was mainly the aristocrats and courtiers who would study rhetoric but during the Renaissance the common person was able to study rhetoric. This was due greatly to the invention of the printing press which allowed rhetorical teachings to be available to everyone. Rhetoricians of the Renaissance interestingly focused on Cicero’s humanitas teaching and dismissed many other ancient rhetoricians work such as Aristotle. Famous Renaissance Rhetorician Petrarch admired Cicero for his concept that man should be able to combine literary art, moral philosophy and civic responsibility to writing and oratory. This concept was adopted by many and the expanded to northern countries in the 1400 and 1500s. In England Sir Thomas More attempted to adapt the humanist concept of rhetoric to educational purposes beyond the clergy, law and medicine. The idea of rhetoric teachings during this era was that any man or women can learn rhetoric and apply it to their daily life. Rhetoric was therefore simplified to make it easier for the common person to adopt.

            This concept of simplification was most adopted by Peter Ramus. Ramus ideas were threatening during the 1500s, especially for monarchs. Ramus attached Aristotle and Scholasticism thinking, which took an overtone of religious reform towards the Roman Catholic Church. Ramus dominant idea was that the ability to reason is innate in every normal human being and one did not learn it from Aristotle or classical sources. He stated that it was pointless to excessively study classical language and ancient texts. Ramus believed in a simplified rhetoric. He separated philosophy, or dialectic in to ten spheres which consists of: causes, effects, subjects, adjuncts, opposites, comparisons, names, divisions, definitions, and witnesses. He focused on the arrangement of the rhetorical arguments as a structure of syllogism where the argument begins general and then gets more specific. Overall Ramus method simplifies as it universalizes.

            Rhetoric in the Renaissance was the beginning of modern rhetoric. The idea that rhetoric should be available for all is something that is still believed today. Although modern rhetoric does pay more attention ancient rhetoricians ideas, the rhetoric practiced in the Renaissance still impacted modern rhetoric.

Reflection Essay

The Art of Speech Making

“Speech was given to man to disguise his thoughts”- Charles M. De Talleyrand (“Speech Quotes” 2011). In the process of studying ancient rhetor’s speeches and constructing my own I came to find that speech writing is an art that makes personal opinions sound wise. From studying the ancient rhetor Isocrates speech Against the Sophists I was able to acquire valuable rhetoric techniques that helped me to develop my own speech, which I choose to mirror similar to Isocrates by arguing against University of Washington’s education system. 

            For this assignment I choose to imitate Isocrates Against the Sophists because in this speech Isocrates took something that was purely his own opinion and made it sound logical, something that I found both interesting and appealing. From studying Isocrates speech, I observed that he used a variety of techniques to make his argument believable to the audience. In my examination, I found that Isocrates used eight rhetorical techniques. He began the speech with his main argument, and then gave a personal statement that he proved with the opinion of someone famous. Following, Isocrates listed the benefits that the Sophists offered. For instance, Isocrates states that the Sophists promise, “to persuade our young men that if they will only study under them they will know what to do in life and through this knowledge will become happy and prosperous” (Bizzel and Herzberg 72). After listing the benefits the Sophist offer, Isocrates asks the audience to question if the benefits our worth the costs, by stating that, “they set so insignificant a price on the whole stock of virtue and happiness” (Bizzel and Herzberg 73),  proving that the Sophists teaching is not worth the cost. Isocrates then goes on to tell the audience to not follow what society has deemed normal, but to trust in your own self will to become knowledgeable and successful. With this idea that it is the individual’s choice in the audiences mind, Isocrates directs the speech towards how society is also to blame in the Sophists dominance over education. He then begins to further list the negatives of the Sophists teaching. Here Isocrates is giving his personal opinion but proves his views with examples that make the Sophists appear negative to seem more convincing to his audience. Finally, Isocrates concludes his speech by repeating that it is the individual’s choice to decide what is right for them, and finishes with a statement that explains that although he is not an expert on the subject, he believes that he has provided enough evidence in his argument to convince the audience that he is right. Ultimately, Isocrates leaves it up to the audience to decide if they are for Sophist teaching or against it; something that I tried to possess in my own speech.

            Following Isocrates theme on arguing against an education system, I decided to make my speech an argument against the University of Washington’s education system. I attempted to follow Isocrates rhetorical techniques in the same order that he used in Against the Sophists. This is evident from my opening argument that follows the same sentence structure as Isocrates beginning statement. Another example of my imitation on Isocrates speech is the statement I made addressing the audience to decide for themselves what kind of education is right for them.  This can be seen from when I say, “ultimately it is up to the individual to decide what they believe to be true. To do this though, people must be willing to open their eyes and to see all sides.” I wanted to evoke the same passion in my speech as Isocrates had in his. In my effort to appear passionate about my topic, I tried to use formal language as Isocrates had done. I personally found the process of speech writing to be difficult. Although I followed the same rhetorical techniques as Isocrates, I don’t believe my speech was as convincing as his. I found it hard to find evidence to support my opinion on University of Washington’s education system. If I had provided more solid proof to support my opinion I believe my speech would have been much stronger and more convincing. In the future, if I write another speech arguing against an institution I would spend more time researching factual examples to support my argument.

            Along with trying to evoke passion into my speech, I attempted to seem enthusiastic in my presentation and voice.  It is my observation that the technique of presentation was one that the majority of ancient rhetor’s used. Through the use of their body movement, voice volume and pronunciation ancient rhetor’s were able to generate specific emotions in their audience. When giving my speech I tried to speak at a fairly loud volume to show that I was serious about what I was arguing. I also made an effort to sound clear and concise to make my audience understand my main point, and to also sound knowledgeable and convincing. Unfortunately, speeches are not my strong suit and I found that I lost my place or stumbled over my words multiple times. On the one hand, this made my speech more authentic, since ancient rhetor’s did not usually memorize their speeches completely or have their speech written in front of them when they presented. On the other hand, I believe that my displacement of thought only brought to attention the serious lack of experience I have in presenting speeches. Overall, I found this assignment rewarding but challenging, and realized the process of speech writing and presenting is an art that can only be done well through excessive practice.

            Speech writing and presenting is a talent that must be done with enthusiasm and creativity. One can only become excellent at the art of rhetorical speech by practicing overtime. Through studying Isocrates speech Against the Sophists, I was able grasp an idea of the techniques needed to make a speech organized and appealing to an audience. I imitated Isocrates speech by constructing a speech against the education system of the University of Washington.  I followed Isocrates order of rhetorical techniques and attempted to use voice and body movement methods in my presentation.  Speeches are a way for people to make their personal thoughts sound right and logical. Through this assignment I discovered this and am able to appreciate the experience that it taught me.