Rhetoric & the Language of Persuasion

Political Rhetoric

Political rhetoric in the Philippines: What’s the matter and why it matters

“Vilification” - abusive speech or writing

“Vacuous” - mindless
“Inimical” - harmful

Condor et al. (2013) - mostly concerned with strategies used in constructing persuasive
messages in debates and disputes.

- The study of political rhetoric therefore touches upon the fundamental activities of
DEMOCRATIC POLITICS

Dryzek (2010) noted that rhetoric is also central to grass-roots political action:

“Rhetoric facilitates the making and hearing of representation claims spanning subjects
and audiences … democracy requires a deliberative system with multiple components
whose linkage often needs rhetoric.”

Aristotle described political (deliberative) oratory as an argument that is concerned with

weighing up alternative future courses of action relating to finances, war and peace, national
defense, trade, and legislation.
 Difference Between the Classical Period & the Modern World

Classical Period
- Required a loud voice and formal gestures, as orators spoke in person to mass
audiences

Modern World
- Typically mediated to distal audiences by textual or electronic means of communication
often blurring the distinction between politics and entertainment

Political Rhetoric and Identity

- Aristotle argued that audiences could be swayed not only by the style and content of an
argument, but also the character projected by the speaker (ethos)

- Attitude of a perceiver toward as source of information at a given time

- An audience member’s evaluation of the speaker’s character

- Showing of the sincerity and the trustworthiness of the speaker

Three Categories of Ethos or Components of an Ethical Speech

Phronesis - involving wisdom and practical skill
Arete - morality and virtue
Eunoia - goodwill towards the audience

Consubstantiality (Burke, 1969)

- Identification lies at the heart of all persuasive rhetoric for “you persuade a man [sic] only
insofar as you can talk his language by speech, gesture, tonality, order image, attitude,
idea, identifying your ways with his.”
- Projected commonality between speaker and audience

Persuasive Strategies in Political Rhetoric

- Taking and avoiding sides
Appeal to as many groups as possible without sacrificing loyalty

- Explicit appeals to common in-group membership

Finding or establishing a commonality among them
Single Rhetorical Identity - a group bounded by an overarching characteristic

3 Requirements to be an Effective Political Leader

1. Diverse communities must be regrouped into a single identity category
2. Leader’s propositions must fulfill the needs of this category
3. The leader must present him/herself as a prototypical in-group member
- Constructing aspirational identities

Constructive Futurity (Frank, 2010)

- A form of representation in which the object of political address (e.g. the
“nation”) is projected into an undetermined future. In this way, a speaker
is not confined to constructing a common rhetorical ingroup located in the
narrative here-and-now, but can speak to, and on behalf of, “a people that
is not … yet.”

An aspiring candidate may want audience members to envision a future which is

markedly different from the present

Constructing future identities of audience members as more empowered and

privileged members of society - the speaker aims to rally the public towards an
achievable change

Advocate for a group that is “currently positioned outside, or on the margins of, a
particular political community.”

- Implicit displays of rhetorical alignment

Indirect means of influencing the thoughts of audience members
- Clothing
- Body posture
- Paralanguage and Language
- Gestures
Threefold classification of speech situation shows:
1) Courtroom (forensic/judicial) speaking: considers whether or not something was just legal
2) Ceremonial (epideictic) speaking: praises or blames a persons for their actions
3) Political (deliberative) speaking: intended to either persuade ppl

Dialectic vs. Rhetoric

Dialectic Rhetoric
One on one discussion One person addressing many
Counterpart/offshoot of dialectic

Available means of persuasion based on three kinds of artistic proof: PEL

1. Logical/Logos: logical proof, comes from the line of argument in a speech
2. Ethical/Ethos: perceived source of credibility
a) Perceived intelligence
b) Virtuous character
c) Goodiwill
3. Emotional/Pathos: emotional proof, draws from those who hear it

Canons of rhetoric: principle divisions of the art of persuasion established by ancient

rhetoricans (IAMDS)
Invention: speaker’s hunt for arguments that will be effective in a particular speech
Arrangement: speakers should avoid complicated shemes of organization
Style: metaphor to help audience visualize
Memory: modern equivalent in rehearsal
Delivery: planned or staged are rejected

The Rhetorical Situation

Bitzer (1968)
o It is the situation which calls the rhetorical discourse into existence
o Prerequisite to rhetorical discourse

Exigence
o Problem addressed by rhetorical discourse
o An imperfection, defect, obstacle

When can an exigence be considered not rhetorical?

o If cannot be modified
o Modified only by means other than discourse
o Modification requires merely one’s own action or the application of a tool, but neither
requires nor invites the assistance of discourse

Audience
o Mediators of change
o People who can be influenced by a rhetorical discourse
A rhetorical situation does not require an audience all the time
o Need to engage with another mind to have generative knowledge
o These are audiences that are capable of receiving knowledge or capable of participating
in aesthetic experiences
o But these audiences must be capable of serving as mediator if the change which
the discourse functions to produce

Constraints
o People, events, objects, and relations that have the power to influence the decisions and
actions of the audience in order to modify the exigence
o Beliefs, attitudes, documents, facts, traditions, images, interests motives

Two main classes of constraints:

o Artistic proofs/Internal proofs: those originated or managed by the rhetor and his
methods
o Logical: comes from the line of the speech
o Ethical: the way the speaker’s character is revealed through the message
o Emotional: draws from those who hear it
o Operative (Inartistic proofs): the speaker do not create
o Testimonies of witness, documents