CTAC 460 Prof.

Quiel FINAL EXAM • Epistemology:

Brian Morski 4/22/12

Epistemology is the study of what is true within a given culture at a given time. Rhetoric is said to create a version of what is true within a certain context, and thus it is epistemic, or having to do with the study of knowledge and what is true or false. Because it is more situational than other methods it is criticized as only finding a version of truth or not being able to discover things “truly”, but its ability to operate within a context makes it more flexible and useful in many situations. • Ontology: Ontology is the study of humans, human nature, and the experience of being human as it is perceived by us within our societal frameworks, as well as how we create identities within the context of our awareness of our own existence within a societal framework. • Sophists: Early Greek teachers who specialized in rhetoric, frequently hired to improve a clients public speaking and constructing arguments or engage in debates on their clients behalf. As teachers of rhetoric they believed in the power of language and ideas, but that truth and morality were relative. Their ability to represent any side in an argument (and willingness to choose sides based on money and not morality) led some to see them as tricksters at best and a scourge on society at worst. • Five canons of rhetoric:

Five methods of examining rhetoric that were originally utilized by the Greeks (Aristotle is one of the scholars most attributed to these theories), although they were not collected as such until later. The five canons are invention, arrangement, style, delivery, and memory, and each will be discusses individually below. • Invention: The 1st canon of rhetoric, Invention concerns discovery and development of the subject and substance that is the rhetoric. Inventions is generally divided into three categories: (1) Stasis, which has to do with the disputed facts, the nature of what happened, and a definition of terms that are being used; (2) proof in support of the claims of the rhetor including, artistic and inartistic proof, as well as Ethos, Pathos, and Logos (discussed below); and (3) topoi, which are common arguments that the rhetor might utilize, such as using an opponent’s words against them and judging an action by its outcomes. • Ethos: Proof as established by the credibility of the speaker, such as visual appearance, mannerisms, background, and implicated associations. The essence of this is to utilize the perceptions of the audience to make them identify with the speaker and the ideas discussed. • Pathos: The understanding of an audiences emotions and how to utilize that to enhance support for the argument. Emotions like anger, fear, hope, joy, and sadness are powerful methods for drawing the audience closer to the speaker and thus for furthering a

viewpoint or plan of action. If the speaker can make the audience identify with him/her then a major hurdle to acceptance has been overcome. • Logos: The use of logic or the appearance of logic to persuade the audience to agree with the rhetor. There are two major types of logical arguments, (1) induction and (2) deduction. Induction is the utilization of observations to draw conclusions about similar things in the future, or all such situations in general (i.e. every swan I have seen is white, thus all swans are white); it is not foolproof but is generally accurate enough for day-to-day usage. Deduction is the drawing of a conclusion from two or more premises, the strength of which is based in the strength of the founding statements. Deduction is the stronger of the two criterions but has harder to satisfy tenets. • Arrangement: 2nd canon of rhetoric having to do with the ordering of a text or speech in an effort to improve the reception of the work. A work of rhetoric can be arranged in several formats including: Problem-solution, chronologically, or various multi-step methods of arrangement (Cicero had a 7 step process: (1) Entrance, (2) Narration, (3) Proposition, (4) Division, (5) Confirmation, (6) Rebuttal, and (7) Conclusion). • Style: 3rd canon of rhetoric, style has to do with the nature of the presentation (i.e. the method of saying the words) of the rhetoric. Broken into 3 levels (grand, middle, and simple) and multiple manifestations within the work (including alliteration, repetition, tricolon, antithesis, paradox, and oxymoron) style is commonly recognized in sayings

such as “I came; I saw; I conquered” (tricolon), “ask not what your country can do for you…” (antithesis) and “friendly fire” (oxymoron) are all examples of style in our history of rhetoric. • Delivery: 4th canon of rhetoric primarily focuses on non-verbally communicating or reinforcing the rhetor’s views through things like vocal qualities, physical movements, and pacing of the actual delivery of the speech. Slowing down to show respect or gravity, raising ones voice to highlight indignance, and gesticulations to show frustration or emphasis are all common methods of augmenting the words that are spoken. • Memory: The importance of memory, the 5th canon of rhetoric, has varied throughout history, and may have been more important before speeches were easy to write down or edit. Having to do with the rhetor’s ability to remember the material well enough to deliver it convincingly is critical for the overall reception of the rhetorical work. • Linguistic reflexivity: An awareness of the forces of communication at work in any given setting, as well as an effort to be mindful of these in communicating with others. Elements to be mindful of include the cultures, languages, styles, personalities, and desires of the people involved in the communication as well as an awareness for environmental effects on the interaction. This requires training and practice to be successful at, but is a major tool in proper interpersonal relations. • Semantic triangle:

A theory developed by Ogden and Richards that examines the relations between symbols (words or images), thoughts (ideas about the symbols), and referents (the objects referred to by the symbols) in an effort to identify themes and meaning within a rhetorical artifact. Arranged in a triangle with the three aspects at the points, the connecting lines represent things that are discussed or revealed in the continuum between two of the aspects. Symbol and thought give an idea of symbolization (causal relationship) and can make statements about correctness; thought and referent are about references (other causal relationships) and can make statements about adequacy; and symbol and referent give us insight into what something stands for (imputed relationships) and can make statements about the truth of something. • Symbolic interaction: Symbolic Interaction is a theory for understanding how language creates identities and social collectivities that was developed by George Herbert Mead. Aspects to be analyzed are in three categories: (1) mind, (2) self, & (3) society. Mind is the ability and knowledge of the individual to comprehend the symbols that order and define their culture or society. Self is our ability to understand ourselves as objects within the societal context they inhabit, the understanding of their own abilities, failings, and desires, as well as the realization that the object that they are will change and grow throughout time. Society can also be described as a “universe of discourse” that we create and inhabit through our use of commonly understood terms, words, and ideas. • Identification:

Identification can be broken down into three types: (1) common identification, (2) antithesis, and (3) discrete. The first type has to do with actions of the rhetor to build commonality with the audience, such as claiming common interests, backgrounds, goals, and beliefs. The second has to do with the “us-versus-them” dynamic to build commonality (i.e. “we would never think that, right?”). Discrete identification can be defined as any time in which inclusive language is used: the “we” in the previous example is on such situation, and terms like “American”, “Conservative”, and “Christian” are all examples where an idea is linked to the speaker (and hopefully the speaker and the idea to the audience) by how they refer to themselves as within one group or another. • Pentad: Burkean model for locating and understanding motives within a rhetorical artifact; made up of the terms act, agent, agency, scene, and purpose. Act is defined as the action in question, what is being discussed by the rhetoric. An agent is the entity that has the ability to choose within the setting, i.e. the person or group that has deciding influence within the context. Agency is the means to carry out what is being proposed by the rhetor, i.e. the sheriff who enforces the law or other such authority figure. Scene is the background or the setting for the action being discussed, including things like time, climate, population, recent or distant events that can have impact, or things like social or political climate can all influence the scene and thus the rhetoric. Purpose is the reason an action did, will, or should take place. 18. Terms for order:

Stages of tragic redemption as defined by Burke using the terms guilt, purification, and redemption are known as Terms for Order. A method of addressing and assuaging wrongs within the social context and, guilt is that acceptance of culpability in a situation, purification is the method of addressing the wrong, and redemption is the function of returning to a state of balance (i.e. removing the guilt). Purification can be done in two ways, mortification (the public acknowledgement of the wrongdoing and a request for forgiveness from the social group) and scapegoats (a representative for the wrongdoing to be attached to whose sacrifice in some way addresses the ill). A scapegoat can be purified (or made “worthy”) in one of three ways: (1) legally, such as a court trial or some other official proceeding that assigns culpability for an act; (2) fatalistically, such as the fated character of Oedipus; (3) by being “too good for the world”, the most famous example being Jesus. 19. Ratio: Ratio is the relationship between two aspects of the pentad in accordance to each other; the existence of imbalances in the rhetoric of one pentadic perspective versus another and the analysis that the competing perspectives afford. 20. Fantasies: Bormann’s term for the stories that people tell themselves and each other that reinforces their common view of themselves and the world. Fantasies can be both tangible and intangible, but both are treated as concrete in regards to their influence on the people sharing the fantasy. 21. Narrative probability:

One of two aspects of Fisher’s Narrative Paradigm (with Narrative Fidelity below); a standard for evaluating rhetoric using the ability of a narrative to stay consistent with itself. Composed of structural (whether the story directly contradicts itself), material (how well the story represents facts within itself), and characterological coherence (the reliability of the characters within the story). 22. Narrative fidelity: The second standard of Fisher’s Narrative Paradigm; a method of checking elements within a narrative for consistency of logic and substance. The theory is to contrast various aspects or elements of a narrative against each other within the framework of the narrative itself, in an attempt to determine the audience’s ability to comprehend the elements successfully. Five concepts or questions make up Narrative Fidelity: (1) the question of fact refers to the values conveyed within a story; (2) relevance is regarding the appropriateness of said values to the topic at hand and how decisions will be made; (3) consequence has to do with what the outcomes of holding to specific values for the making of the decision; (4) consistency examines whether the values of the narrative are in line with the audience’s and confirm their opinions; and (5) transcendent issues speak to a higher calling or essence for human conduct, i.e. if what is being discussed is in line with “the greater good”. 23. Fantasy themes: Shared experiences or stories retold among a group of people; themes underlie individual stories and tie them into the greater body of societal rhetoric, and also add to the overall concept and strength of the whole.

24. Fantasy types: The patterns of fantasies containing similar characters, settings, or struggles that are repeated throughout a group’s narratives that explain, support, and create group beliefs. 25. Rhetorical vision: A rhetorical vision is the greater narrative or world-view that is created by the “chaining out” or sharing of themes, types, and ideographs throughout a group that creates its perspective. 26. Ideology: A set of beliefs and meanings that are generated by artifacts, and arranged into an interrelated structure that make up a person’s world-view. The Statue of Liberty, American Flag, and Pledge of Allegiance have meanings that are representative of the ideology of American culture and what it means to be American. 27. Hegemony: The body of ideas that a dominant culture utilizes to aid its subversion of other cultures, primarily (but not exclusively) within a nation or region. Things like over-consumption, supporting things that are against their own interest in an attempt to “fit in”, and the “American Dream” are all ways of forcing-through-encouragement to buy in to the system that exists. When successful, hegemony is nearly invisible and is incredibly powerful in social control. 28. Ideographs:

The method of conveying ideology and unity through words and phrases that are intended to stir the listener to identify with the speaker and their goals and values. A foundational element of rhetoric, ideographs are widely used in our culture and are called things like public relations, image building, and “branding”, but essentially it is convincing people to support or consume things and ideas. Corporations, entertainers, spiritual leaders, independent businesses, and political groups have long used ideographs to promote their causes (to remarkable success). 29. Critical rhetoric: Critical Theory examines domination and freedom within the relative structure of a rhetorical vision. The desire is to understand the rhetorical sources and uses of power within the appropriate context as well as to chart the flow or influence and control. 30. Feminism: The desire to have ones race, culture, orientation, class, beliefs, or any other trivial factor (i.e. the things about us that are too deeply ingrained to be simple “choices”) should have no bearing in the social, legal, economic or political arenas. While primarily associated with women’s rights it is not exclusive or sexist in its goals; the desire is to have an equal playing field for individuality and success. 31. Invitational rhetoric: Foss & Griffin’s theory for audience importance within rhetoric that is grounded in modern ideas of equality and self-determinism, specifically concerning how to encourage the audience to make choices about the rhetor’s messages individually. Based on two points, (1) offering perspective and (2) creating an atmosphere of willing

openness and respect for all view-points presented, the goal is to effect the environment of the communication to better allow all involved to participate fairly. 32. Gender diversity perspective: Designed by Condit to be compatible with other feminist rhetorical theories and social goals while separating rhetoric from ordinary speech, Gendered Diversity Perspective is an attempt at respecting rhetoric and also allowing the furthering of feminist (a/k/a human equality) desires. Based on the belief that rhetoric is persuasion in the public sphere, this theory promotes the notion that there are more than the two “traditional” genders and that not all rhetors are created equal (i.e. some people are more gifted at the art of persuading through rhetoric than others). 33. Postmodern: The theory that our realities are at least mediated and effected by our linguistic creations that we use to communicate with each other. Identified with the world of the Information Age where so many things seem to have lost their infallibility; traditional structures, ideas, and narratives no longer seemed sacrosanct and the goal was to find drastically new ways of seeing the world and defining it for the future, not based upon the past.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful