Embedded Files
In the words of Aristotle—er, John Belushi—"Toga! Toga! Toga! Toga! (Source)
Get ready, because all that stuff you read about Ancient Greeks and Romans during the first unit is about to pay off.
Not literally, of course. This isn't trivia night, and we're not handing out gift certificates to the winning team. But knowing what you know about those ancient orators and rhetoricians is going to give you a leg up in this lesson's readings.
If you're panicking right now because you can't remember a single ancient dude's name, then here's a quick recap of the three Heinrichs is going to name-drop in the next couple chapters:
Aristotle: Ancient Greek guy who pretty much invented the system of rhetoric we're talking about. Wrote lots of treatises, one of which was called—you guessed it—Rhetoric.
Cicero: Known as the greatest orator of the Roman Republic. Wrote De Oratore, which was chock-full of great tips for aspiring orators.
Quintilian: Ancient Roman guy and author of Institutio Oratoria, in which he argued that a true orator uses rhetoric for good, not evil.
Knowing that Heinrichs writes about the same subjects these three paragons of rhetoric were concerned with, it makes total sense that he starts Chapter 7 with an example from the movie Animal House…the epitome of the raunchy college comedy genre.
CRAFTY CARING
First things first: Heinrichs opens the next chapter you'll read with a reference to the movie Animal House. If it's been a while since you watched Animal House (or if—gasp—you've never seen it at all), then go ahead and take a couple hours to watch it. Not because it will actually help you better understand the chapter, but because it's hilarious.
So: whether you've chosen to plow ahead with this unit or you've just come back from an hour and a half of comedy gold, it's time to read the following chapters from Thank You For Arguing:
Chapter 7: Use Your Craft (pages 68-73)
Chapter 8: Show You Care (pages 74-80)
As you read, keep in mind what Quintilian believed about what makes a true orator and decide whether you agree or not.
Ch 7.pdfCh 8.pdfThere's Nothing Behind this Rhetoric
There's Nothing Behind this Rhetoric
Maybe at this point (if you haven't already), you've started thinking that a lot of what Heinrichs is suggesting you do to "win" a persuasive argument sounds a lot like…um…lying.
We get that. Phrases like "when you seem to share your audience's values…they believe you will apply them" (from page 69) don't exactly make it sound like truth is the main goal.
All the examples from politics in the book can make it difficult not to focus on the seedy underbelly of rhetoric. We're not so much used to our politicians giving Gettysburg-Address-level speeches these days. We are very used to hearing politicians saying whatever they think will get them elected. During election time, news articles across the land are sprinkled with the phrase "empty rhetoric" to characterize politician's speeches. (See here for examples.)
Yeah, lots of politicians have mastered the art of rhetoric. Sometimes they actually back up their rhetoric with meaningful action…and sometimes they don't. But before you dismiss all this rhetoric stuff as tricks for professional liars to dupe people, we'd like to stress a few key points:
Politicians aren't the only people who use rhetoric. Everyone who speaks in public uses it, to some extent.
Rhetoric does not require lying (although certainly a person could use rhetoric to pass lies off as the truth). Instead, rhetoric does require a certain amount of manipulation (which absolutely does not have to involve lying).
Rhetoric can come off as phony sometimes because it also requires a performance. To paraphrase Heinrichs: don't be yourself. Perform yourself.
How exactly does one perform oneself and not come off as phony? Two answers: pre-planning and practice.
We'll talk about strategies for both in a later unit. Don't worry—it doesn't involve any crazy method acting techniques. We know you're not Daniel Day-Lewis, and we don't want you to be. Mostly because that guy scares us a little bit—he's just too talented.
Google Sites
Report abuse