The Evolution Of Rhetoric In The Electronic Age Essay

The Evolution Of Rhetoric In The Electronic Age Media Essay

The reason for this research paper is to discuss the future rhetoric of our new Electronic Generation. Rhetoric is an art of public speaking and, in our day and age, electronics play a major part. This paper will explain the rhetorical aspects of this potential transformation into an “all electronic world”. The information of this paper will explain the history of rhetoric and how we got to where we are today. It will also speak of some the major philosophers about this change in our new generation.

WRITE THIS ESSAY FOR ME

Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper.

Get Help Now!

Rhetoric is defined as the art or study of using language effectively and persuasively. From ancient Greece to the late nineteenth century, it was an essential part of Western education to teach public speakers and writers to persuade listeners to action with arguments. At the turn of the 20th century, there was a profound interest of rhetorical study began to grow in the organization of departments of rhetoric and speech at colleges and universities, as well as the development of national and international professional organizations.

Some modern theorists believe that it was important to restore the interest of the study of rhetoric because of the renewed importance of language and persuasion in the progressively reconciled environment of the twentieth century and through the twenty-first century, with the media spotlight on the wide difference s and analyses of political rhetoric and its result s. With the expansion of marketing and of mass media such as photography, telegraphy, radio, and film, rhetoric is being more notably conveyed into people’s lives.

In spite of its legacy as a moral way for persuasion, rhetoric has come to take on negative undertones. Through the years, generations have forgotten what’s the real meaning of rhetoric is and has somehow implicate that this word is deceptive and untrustworthy. Today, rhetoric is greatly utilized by mass media in a derogatory manner, particularly when associated to public policies and politicians.

Rhetoric as a systematic study was developed by a group of orators, educators, and advocates called Sophists. In the book, The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction by James Herrick, he states, “Sophists employed paradoxes to shock their audiences, but also by this means to provoke debate and inquiry” (Herrick, 2009). The Sophists’ outlook on rhetoric may very well have been the spark that ignited today’s global misunderstanding on the meaning behind rhetoric.

Sophists viewed rhetoric as a means that could unite pleasure with government. Sophists believed that words had the ability to medicate the audience. Although during this time when rhetoric was a skill with an increasingly expressive demand, it began to alter to a negative nuance as Plato’s criticisms grew more popular.

The most primitive paradigm of rhetoric as a derogatory word can be followed back to Plato and his opinions about the Sophists. As one of Socrates’ renowned students, Plato often portrayed the Sophists as highly skillful writers who made the most of misleading language methods to persuade and influence audiences. Plato’s assumption on Sophism, also reiterated through the writings of Isocrates, was based on the gluttony, deception and the general lack of trust and apprehension for justice. Sophists could manipulate speech to make the worse situation appear better.

The term Sophism continues to maintain the negative reputation in today’s society. In Rereading the Sophists: Classical Rhetoric Refigured, author Susan Jarratt defines sophism as “a derogatory term for a carefully crafted yet false argument aimed at deceiving someone” (Jarratt, 1998).

Sophism is also used today to describe rhetorical circumstances in which emotional demands may be emphasized over logical demands. Sophism and rhetoric have shared these negative connections into our modern era.

As Christianity began to extend in the Middle Ages after the fall of the Roman Empire, societies started to connect rhetoric as expressive and fancy, but it was short of any knowledge or general idea. Due to the Church not believing expressiveness was an important aspect to communication and speech, rhetoric was diminished and viewed depreciatively.

By the sixteenth century, rhetoric’s reputation had been revitalized, but some prominent scholars continued to pass judgment on rhetoric. Reformer Peter Ramus questioned rhetoric by stating that rhetoric was mainly a kind of verbal enhancement and as a result of little consequence. As Ramus praised dialectic and called rhetoric into question, rhetoric lost its theoretical influence, and was again viewed as nothing more than a stylistic, pessimistic speech tool. In his scheme of things, the five components of rhetoric no longer lived under the common heading of rhetoric. Instead, invention and disposition were determined to fall solely under the heading of dialectic, while style, delivery, and memory were all that stayed for rhetoric. In The Electronic Word: Technology, Democracy, and Arts written by Richard Lanham, he expresses that Ramus “separated thought from language” by developing a replica of education in which “reason breaks free of speech” (Lanham, 1993, pp. 157-158). Language became an impartial tool for conveying the findings of other disciplines, and was no longer viewed as the