The evolution of rhetoric from Aristotle's ethical persuasion to modern deception

¶ … rhetoric and how is has been altered ever since Aristotle's days. The major emphasis is laid on comparing the two forms of rhetoric and seeing how it has changed over time. There is discussion on the use of rhetoric in daily life, politics and the media.

Rhetoric

Rhetoric is basically the art of speaking or language that has long been helping writers and speakers. The main purpose behind the use of rhetoric is to motivate or persuade people. Many a times people confuse informing and persuasion. Rhetoric has been used for informing people and just mere informative talk; however the main reason behind using it is to persuade persons. The skill of rhetoric has been used a lot in the Western culture and has played a central role in it. Sadly enough, rhetoric hasn't remained what Aristotle initially proposed it to be. In simple words, it could be that the over use of rhetoric has gone to give it a bad name. It isn't looked as a skill anymore by most of the people. Rather, it is seen as a cover for deception or hiding what is righteously true. The reason behind these perceptions is because of the media, economy and politics today.

Today we see the use of rhetoric so much that we have gone to question its credibility? Credibility. This is one of the major tools in rhetoric. Surely, in the time of Aristotle, rhetoric would have been something used for the general good of the people. Things aren't quite similar to what rhetoric used to be in Aristotle's time.

It has evolved in a good way because now humans are learning how to communicate with each other in a more skillful way. In other words, speech is not just direct and without any art. Use of rhetoric and skillful speech as per say is surely visible

Aristotle's View

Aristotle characterized rhetoric as the skill of the most readily available tool of persuasion. In his perception, rhetoric was something that was quite crucial in a decent social and political life. "It appears," Aristotle says, that although "rhetoric is an offshoot of the study of dialectic; it also involves a practical understanding of ethics in connection with politics." (Translated by Roberts, Barnes, 1356a 25-30) Thus, it should be seen that when Aristotle talked about the use of rhetoric's, he meant that rhetoric should be used ethically and morally as well.

Aristotle's rhetoric's meant that when a person uses retroact, he should be able to understand what he is doing and he should be clever enough to do it as well. (Rorty) Apart from being clever and intellectual, the person himself should be able to calculate and understand it. The reasoning the use of rhetoric that he presents should be in a proper direction. Aristotle stated that the virtue of the argument has to be for the right thing and the right time. This greatly contrasts with what rhetoric is being used for now a days. In other words, a good amount of persuasions can be also used and is widely being used for something that is bad or morally in correct. Wrong or misleading things are being put in a positive light just due to the use of rhetoric. Aristotle backed up and supported the use of rhetoric so a person would fight for and persuade people for what was right.

Aristotle believed that a person who is to become a public figure should be able to evaluate an argument and be able to stand up for what his right. He should find the right words and the right argument and thus make his statements and his ideas public. Aristotle stated that a man who has wisdom he should have all the habits as well that make him eligible to use rhetoric as a tool for persuasion. In other words, Aristotle thought that if a politician would want to stand up for something, he should have the right understanding of that issue first. After having an understanding of the issue, he should be able to know which the right way for the argument is. In other words, his persuasion and debate should be virtuous, correct and generally beneficial for the entire population. (Rorty)

The book that Aristotle wrote about Rhetoric explains different means of using rhetoric and the tools that a person can use. Rhetoric itself has a lot of definitions and it can be used in different circumstance as well. The three major rhetorical devices as mentioned by Aristotle are ethos, pathos and logos. Ethos is when someone relies on the use of credibility or mention of a source that is known to be credible. Aristotle believed that when a person made use of Ethos, he told the people and thus made them believe that that person was worthy of trust. Aristotle stated that the general population would believe a good man more than they believe a bad man. In other words, if a person is known to have good character, thus his speech and his words would be more persuading as compared to any one else's. (Aristotle, 3-13) Secondly, Pathos is when someone relies on the use of emotions and psychology of the audience. Lastly, logos is the use of reasoning and logic. Another part of Aristotle three book series introduces the different elements of style in rhetoric. He talks about word choice, tone, sentence structure, and use of metaphors. (Vickers, 19)

All in all, a major difference between Aristotle's rhetoric and the rhetoric used now is that back then it was a skill that not many people posses. It was either seen in religious leaders or persons in politics with the ability to tell a man right from wrong. It other words, rhetoric's was a tool used to inform people and to persuade them about something that they didn't know of. If the persons in an area were going on towards a wrong direction, Aristotle talked about the use of rhetoric in order to steer him in the right direction. For example, it is not the function of medicine simply to make a man quite healthy, but to put him as far as may be on the road to health; it is possible to give excellent treatment even to those who can never enjoy sound health (Aristotle, 1355 b) The analogy that art stole gave of a doctor to someone who uses rhetoric shows that it was made initially to guide people towards what is right. Thus a major difference between rhetoric back in Aristotle's days and rhetoric now is the connotation that it has.

Use of rhetoric in Politics

When Aristotle talked about a leader, the characteristics that came to mind were virtue noble base and vice. Praise," he observed, "is the expression in words of the eminence of a person's good qualities, and therefore we must display one's actions as a product of such qualities" (Aristotle, 9.28-30). This quote of Aristotle can be used to describe the plethora of good traits and attributes that a politician claims that he has. Which means that someone who is good person and is of good character will actually go on do something good as well? It is the actions of the doing the act part is what our politicians usually forget. (Reynolds, 2) "To praise a person is in one respect akin to urging a course of action" (Aristotle, I. 9.36). Here is where the entire problem starts. This becomes an issue because many a time's a president or a politician will say something that is not acceptable by the entire community. For the president, that action is the right way to go, but for some persons into the community it is wrong. Thus, this praise and blame technique or Epideictic has been used by many presidents in their speeches. For instance, a study done by Casey revealed that speeches president Ronald Reagan used to give were quite closely related and accepted the norms of the society back then. For instance, the military eulogies that Reagan gave were to "legitimate political authority" and "to subvert the public's capacity for effective dissent against war" (John)

Not many would remember Reagan's speeches or his use of politics. However, the current president of the United States, President Obama does use rhetoric quite a lot in his speeches. This could be said because his speeches are quite impressive and quite persuasive as well. As mentioned earlier, use of rhetoric is an art and it should be used very smartly. Obama resorts to use to of resorts to Rawlsian ideas (Gedick 891) and as well religious ideas. The 2004 speech that the present delivered to the Democratic Nation Convention, he mentioned religion and God quite a lot. Some of the things that President Obama said were

Use of rhetoric in media

If we look around us then the use of rhetorical devices is present everywhere. From advertisements on billboards and newspaper to promotional films online. The entire advertising industry is full of rhetorical devices in one form or another. The use of rhetoric today has been overused and actually misused so much that when people appear to be learned or knowledgeable about something, they are questioned to be using too much rhetoric. In other words, these people might actually have knowledge. That knowledge could be truthful and unbiased and totally credible, but because rhetoric has a negative connotation, no one would believe that person. Not everyone stays safe from the trap of the rhetorical devices. The reason why so many product sales go high after a rhetorical commercial is because people actually fall for the stuff. When during a hand wash commercial, the phrase "doctors say" or "experts say" come in, people actually think that doctors and experts believe in that kind of stuff.

The media's major aim today is to alter the public's way of thinking. If any piece of entertainment or advertisement per say is not successful in doing say, it is said that is not a successful piece of media. (Kock, 103)

Now many would think why there is the use of persuasion or rhetoric per say in the media and why is it so important to alter the way the public thinks. This brings us towards social sciences and how the ruling powers want the masses to have a certain mindset. Anyone who doesn't fall in the trap or argues about its credibly, will therefore disrupt the structure of the society. Thus, this is what the capitalists and those who are ruling really want. If looked at it from a general perspective then there is no theory about how pubic communication should be in order to fulfill its role in the society today. (Kock, 104)

If seeing directly, then media provides the only link between the people and the politics that actually taking palace. Thus it up to the media to develop a sense of trust between them and the viewer. (Norris) Those who are watching a news channel put their trust and confidence in the people such that they won't tell them misleading information. The best of rhetoric is seen when the media puts up a commercial or a promotional film in order to attain donations. There they would pictures and videos that would appeal to the heart. There is use of words that cause a person and motivate him or her to want to donate. In other words, the way a message or a cause is presented is so heartwarming that the person automatically falls into the trap. Many would think that fine media and advertising is using rhetoric to persuade people and change their mind. They are presenting their product or their message in such a way that they alter the mindset of those who are watching. Why is it such a problem?

As it is mentioned earlier, rhetoric is being misused now. Truth is being distorted and credibility is being challenged. Media is framing and staging things into being something that they actually aren't. Let's take the example of the promotional film for the use of attaining charity. What is the guarantee that all that the media is saying and is portraying is actually the truth? How do we know that the facts, the pictures, or the videos aren't staged? The viewers or the public in general can never say that these persons are hired actors or actually real people in distress. Due to this distortion of the facts and reality, use of rhetoric has now earned a negative connotation. Anyone who goes to appeal to emotions, credibility or even logic, many people don't fall for the trap. Let alone falling for the trap, persons now think about it and actually challenge the claim that a certain advertisement is making.

Use of rhetoric in business

The use of rhetoric in business has already been touched upon by mentioning promotional or advertisement films. The major aim of businesses is to attract customers and have their product, service or idea sell more than the other. Total Quality Management is a technique that is used to attract more and more customer. Total Quality Management is when business goes and gives customer the best quality products in the lowest cost available. Even though that is what the initial plan is, the use of rhetoric is actually used to distort the reality of TQM. (Zbaracki) A rhetorical TWM is basically when a certain organization or company gives excess of TQM. They make the person believe and give them ideas that are far away from reality and they go on to promise not even good but the best quality out there. This sort of rhetorical can work for some however in the long run it might be detrimental to the organization. For instance, an example if taken of a shampoo that shows a girl with amazing and flawless hair. Now the naive customer will go on to think that if she gets that shampoo, her hair will be like that as well. Surely, because of the false rhetoric, the product would get an increase amount of sales at one time. However, with time, when results are far away and the quality is far away from what was promised, the sales of the product will drop. DiMaggio and Powell state that mimetic processes that actually confirm to certain institutions are powerful and more persuasive than the models of perfect quality given by the use of rhetoric. (70) This in turn shows that not all business rely on the use of false rhetoric rather they go for an approach that the common customer can relate to and actually believe. Here it is shown that the use of rhetoric has to be very well though off and smart.

An example of fashion given by Zbaracki is that the fashion trends and fad always come and go. The major sales that the fashion industry or any clothing story per say makes is all to the due to the hype that is created at the moment. In other words, it is not only the way a company or a business advertises that matter but also what the current situation is. Use of rhetoric, or appeal to statistics or emotions will not always attain customers or the kind of sales a business wants.

Use of rhetoric in everyday life

Even though many may not think of it, but a lot of people make use of rhetoric in their everyday lives. In normal conversations with their family and friends, a person can resort to different sort of appeals. Even in our everyday lives, we need to persuade people and somehow convince them about something that they want. If we look into the way we talk to our friends, we might think of how many examples or references we give. Even though we don't have to win a debate or have to be successful in proving our point, we give references to certain doctors, books, websites or even celebrities. We do this subconsciously to make us seem more knowledgeable, credible and learned in the matter that is going on. Our first instinct is to say something that will not be challenged or questioned later. Thus, without even the need to use rhetorical devices, we go on and use them in our everyday conversations.

An example is taken of a little child who is hardly even four years old. This child hasn't attended high school or university thus he hasn't been 'taught' the use of proper rhetorical devices. Nonetheless, when he goes to talk to his mom about a toy that he wants, he would make use of certain skills that are just inbuilt. His intelligence and probably past experiences tell him that when he makes the cute eyes and talks cutely with his mother, she listens. He could also resort to screaming or crying and hopefully end of persuading his mother. Here the child is making use of pathos and is using his emotions to appeal to this mother. Even in this quite simple example, we can take the use of rhetoric in two ways. One way in which the child becomes cute and innocent, the mother will listen to him and this would be an example of a positive use of rhetoric. In the same instance, if the child goes wild and starts screaming and going haywire, the mother will not listen and will send the kid into time out. Both the instance, there was use of rhetoric but one example was successful and the other wasn't.

This goes on to show that rhetorical devices in it are an art of speech and a skill that should be used in the proper way. Aristotle initially came up with the skill and the various devices so that the person using it would get their point across. He didn't think that it would be misused to this extent and it would be used to negatively impact a person's mind. The major through process that Aristotle put behind rhetoric was that it should be used for the right purpose and also to put a person's mind in the right direction.

If we look at the use of rhetoric today, not all of is positive and not all of it is actually working. The metaphors or the way of speaking that one politician has is better than the other and thus it gets him more votes. Before using rhetoric, a person should really think about what he is saying and how the audience would perceive it. There needs to be calculation and judgment that will ultimately make the use of rhetoric useful. Thus, it should be noted that there is a lot of skill and talent required behind the use of proper rhetoric.