Tuesday, May 28, 2013
COM 250 / Week 9 Discussion: Rhetoric and Truth: Can We Have Both?
As our textbook says, human societies have been perplexed with the "truth" nature of rhetoric since we had the first democratic polity in Greece (500 B.C.E.). We kept asking: "does rhetoric help speakers and listeners discern truth, or is it merely concerned with what an audience can be persuaded to believe?" Since the main purpose of rhetoric is to persuade, especially on matters of urgency and for immediate effect, how can we be safe to assume that truth is not sacrificed for persuasive purpose? Consider the rhetorical bombard (or rhetorical pollution if I may) we are facing daily through mass media and public speech, how can we keep a clear mind and our discernment? Have you ever tried to take all those rhetorics, a.k.a, strategic communication, to task in regard to their truthfulness?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I feel that regardless no matter what we do here in America as well as culturally across the globe, rhetoric will always be a part of it since it has been around since the dawn of man. It is a creative way in which to persuade people to listen to what you have to say to get your points across in a manner of which it confuses them up upon the truth of what it is that is really trying to be conveyed towards them. So in a sense we can’t necessarily have both because then people would lose their sense to compete and try to do whatever it takes to get over on their competitor and achieving the common goal of getting ahead. Although there are places in which you can have both but in the cases where you have both present rhetoric will outweigh the truth but the truth will prevail and become victorious to make for a peaceful setting of society. So as we strive to have both globally we will have to side with which one we feel comfortable with decoding as the receiver of a message as well as encoding the message to others that we see on a day to day basis.
ReplyDeleteYes we can have both rhetoric and truth. There is, however, a reputation for rhetorical speakers to manipulate their audiences with their skills. Young public speakers will shape their speeches around truthfulness to create ethos for themselves. Over time they will become comfortable with themselves and feel as though they have mastered speaking and will move towards rhetoric where they can manipulate information for their benefit.
ReplyDeleteFrom personal experience I do use strategic communication to access whether a speech is credible or not, but I only do this when speeches are relatable to topics I already know. Otherwise I am very critical when statistics or logos are used as well as personal opinions. I have a skeptical view on new topics as they are presented to me by other speakers until I feel trustworthy with a speaker or not.
Because there is an overwhelming scale of speakers, from advertisements on TV to political movements in our neighborhoods, it is difficult to regard speakers as being truthful or rhetoric. This adds a layer of work for the audience when listening to speeches. If one wants to listen to a speech then one must do so while analyzing the data presented in real time to realize if the speaker and their information presented is credible or not.