Prefatory Comments

Clash of Two Great Titans: Is Rhetoric the Same as Ideology?

Much that has been posted on this site involves an attempt to draw a distinction between rhetoric and ideology, even though these concepts are not addressed specifically.  Increasingly ideology and rhetoric are used interchangeably, so many of us believing that one person's rhetoric is another's ideology.  On television, for instance, we hear from political commentators who flippantly ridicule individuals as circulating more of their "political rhetoric," as though rhetoric's epistemological equivalent is relativism.  Despite the tendency to consider ideology and rhetoric as synonymous, they have pronounced differences drawn on concepts relating to truth. 

The most alarming conclusion reached when aligning ideology with rhetoric is that the postmodern world can no longer defend an epistemological foundation, where subjectivity has shattered unrecognizable all notion of objective truth.  The most prominent difference between rhetoric and ideology, in fact, involves each concept's epistemological foundation: "Ideologies are ideas whose purpose is not epistemic, but political" (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2).  Conversely, rhetorical analysis sets aside the individual, instead attempting to designate through argument, not sophistry, what can be known about the world. 

Where rhetoric attempts to set aside social convenience and prejudice, ideology serves social goals--goals leading to social progress through the creation of myths (for example, fordism).  Consider Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's view on the subject: "An ideology exists to confirm a certain political viewpoint, serve the interests of certain people, or to perform a functional role in relation to social, economic, political and legal institutions" (2).  An ideology includes ulterior motives aside from truth designation.