The Rhetoric of Injustice
Throughout history arguments and debate have been used to decide the fate of kingdoms, challenge a ruler’s authority or even decided where homes would be built. Without arguments our world would be bland and nothing like it is today. Being able to form a well built argument and use it properly is known as rhetoric. Ancient Romans and Greeks considered rhetoric to be one of the most important skills for students. Even today rhetoric is considered a great feat for all scholars. Two great men who were able to use rhetoric and excel at using it were Cicero and Machiavelli. They both argued in some of their most famous works that at times injustice was defendable. Cicero did this in his piece called The Defense of Injustice. Machiavelli did this in his work called The Prince. Each of these men was from completely different times in history, yet both were able to use rhetoric to help make people support their argument. Although rhetoric has many rules and many different formats one of the most well know and organized format is known as the Toulmin method. With the two pieces of work and using Toulmin’s method of rhetoric we can evaluate and discover who makes the best argument and why.
Today when we say we are having a guy’s night out we think of grabbing a beer with your buddies and watching the game. However in Cicero’s day a guy’s night consisted of sitting in a circle with some alcohol and contemplating the meaning of the world around you. They would ask each other why and what if, and discuss the universe, politics, nature, and every other topic they could think of. In Cicero’s work The Defense of Injustice they discuss whether or not injustice can ever be justifiable and what the situation must be for ...
... middle of paper ...
...velli made the better argument, Cicero was a great writer and as such teaches students and scholars new ideas and beliefs. However this it is an argument, some may say that Cicero was able to compose better rhetoric. What this tells us is that every day we are involved in arguments, whether it is with a loved one, a sibling, our best friend, or the cop that pulled us over.
Works Cited
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. New York: Airmount, 1965. Print.
Nesbitt, Laurel. "Parts of an Argument." Welcome to Writing@CSU. Web. 22 Mar. 2011.
.
"Unification." ItalianHistory.info The History of Italy from Prehistoric times to Today. Italian
History Videos and Audio. Web. 22 Mar. 2011. .
A World of Ideas. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin's, 2010. Print.
Heinrichs begins by explaining the art of rhetoric and laying out the basic tools of argument. He emphasizes the importance of using the proper tense to avoid arguing the wrong issue. Furthermore, he introduces logos, ethos and pathos and shows how to “wield” each rhetorical tool. In Part 2, Heinrichs discusses common logical fallacies as well as rhetorical fouls. He remarks rhetoric’s single rule of never arguing the inarguable and demonstrates how ethos helps to know whom to trust. In Part 3, Kairos becomes an important tool for knowing the right time to persuade one’s audience. In Part 4 of the novel, the author provides examples of how to use rhetorical tools previously introduced in the
In the article “Supremacy Crimes” by Gloria Steinem the author states that its our white, middle class, heterosexual males that are to blame for a lot of murders. Steinem talks about how supremacy is like a drug to people. It makes them like that since they are more powerful or better then somebody, the can kill them. Steinem also says that the white male, middle class, heterosexual is the cause for most of the mass murders and sadistic killings. Steinem states later in the article that the country has a high rate for these types of killings because of the violence video games. Steinem states that America wont be able to reduce these violent crimes with out changing the view that males are more dominant then females. Steinem states that
Ramage, John D., John C. Bean, and June Johnson. Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings. 9th ed. Boston: Pearson Education, 2012. Print.
Persuasion Throughout history there have been many struggles for freedom and equality. There was the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. There was the fight against government censorship in Argentina, spoken against by Luisa Valenzuela. And there was the struggle for women's equality in politics, aided by First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt.
– In defense of Marcus Caelius Rufus. Political Writings of Cicero. – (from the Course Packet)
Rhetoric is the art of using language to persuade an audience. Writers and speakers often use rhetoric appeals. Aristotelian Rhetoric appeals are used in arguments to support claims and counter opposing arguments. Rhetoric used four different approaches to capture its audience’s attention: pathos, logos, and ethos. Pathos bases its appeal on provoking strong emotion from an audience. Ethos builds its appeal based on good moral character of the writer or speaker and relies on good sense and good will to influence its audience. Logos persuades its audience through the use of deductive and inductive reasoning. The kiaros approach requires a combination of creating and recognizing the right time and right place for making the argument in the first place. All of these appeals are important tools, and can be used together or apart to persuade an audience.
The central theme of Act III, Scene ii of “Julius Caesar” by William Shakespeare is the power of rhetoric because it shows the effect of two funeral orators’ on the crowd. In this scene, Antony and Brutus have similar purpose in talking to the public, which is to gain the support of the Plebeians according to their conflicting views about Caesar’s assassination. This essay focuses on comparing the orations of the two speakers in this part of the play according to Aristotle’s rhetoric system. According to Aristotle’s writings, Antony’s speech is more persuasive than Brutus’ speech, because he is able to provide logical, emotional and ethical appeals to his audience. Firstly, in comparison to Brutus’ logic, Antony provides more evidence to prove that Caesar was not ambitious. Secondly, Antony’s emotional acts and speech moved his audience more than Brutus. Finally, Antony acts more noble than Brutus does.
Of Cicero it can be said he possessed a bias towards roman life and doctrine. For Cicero
In that light, it is interesting to analyse what it is that made these artistic words such a difference. A difference that persuaded people to change their behavior. Thankfully, human history has created a term to define these great speeches. It is called rhetoric. In this essay we will try to determine whether rhetoric is an art, or merely a
Aristotle builds a case that rhetoric is an art which goes against “Gorgias” written by Plato that states rhetoric is not an art since it is not related to a “definite subject” (Rapp, 2002). Aristotle disagrees with Plato by proposing that rhetoric is an art since it requires being persuasive. The skill of persuasion is no easy task especially when it is concerning passionate topics like politics or beliefs. This leads into the final point to highlight that a true “rhetorician” is a person who is able to see persuasion in every situation (Rapp, 2002). This means that those who truly understand how rhetoric works also understand that even in disagreement, a strong argument is still valid. “The best arguments make use of shared assumptions--beliefs that both the writer and the reader can agree about even if they don 't yet agree about the entire argument” (Wheeler, 2016, para.
There is a man passed out at the base of the statue. This is using a
For most writers, we must know the different types of argumentation styles along with logical fallacies. There are three main types of argumentation styles including: Aristotelian, Rogerian, and Toulmin. All three styles have their own argumentation spin on arguments. Aristotelian refutes the opposing claim while at the same time promoting its own argument by using supporting evidence. Some of that evidence includes using rhetorical appeals such as ethos, logos, and pathos. A Rogerian arguments are the arguments that find the common ground in order for an effective argument. Last but not least there is the Toulmin argument, the Toulmin argument is similar to the Aristotelian argument yet instead of appealing to the audience Toulmin focuses
Aristotle. On Rhetoric. The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. 2nd ed. Ed. Trans. Patricia Bizzell & Bruce Herzberg. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2001. Book I, Chapter V. Print.
Within two classical works of philosophical literature, notions of justice are presented plainly. Plato’s The Republic and Sophocles’ Antigone both address elements of death, tyranny and immorality, morality, and societal roles. These topics are important elements when addressing justice, whether in the societal representation or personal representation.
Dynamic palates of life present themselves in experience and endeavor. Furthermore, they elicit an array of complexions; those concerning the emotion in association with each iridescent shade. One witnesses colorful purpose for the characters in Nectar in a Sieve. Though conveyed simplistically, the depth and implication of each feeling exemplifies itself through these individuals. Fear is a primitive influence on the characters, and it is evident in Rukmani and Kenny. Both express nearly contradicting perspectives; however, a ubiquitous range of emotions allow genuine opinions of these individuals. The characters believe fear exists ominously, but one may prevail over such with internal assurance.