Comments on: Classical Rhetoric 101: The Five Canons of Rhetoric – Style

By: kevin

kevin — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 02:42:16 +0000

the verbs you called ‘helping’ are ‘auxiliary’ verbs. I understand that clarity is always good, but to say “Use no auxiliary verbs” is quite clear.

Yes. I originally typed “Do not use auxiliary verbs.” Guarding my writing against such is now a priority.

Loving this series. Thank you.

By: William P

William P — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 07:51:23 +0000

For those of you interested in how all this applies to debates I suggest the following podcast from NPR: Intelligence Squared.

It’s fun to listen to those podcasts after reading these articles because they a) include arguments concerning sensitive subjects (racial profiling and usefulness of a two party system), and b) see who has paid attention to principles and to see which side changes more of the audiences votes.

Also Brett, thanks for helping me expand my book collection. My ideal personal library is starting to become more substantial.

-W.P.

By: clenbuterol

clenbuterol — Sun, 27 Mar 2011 10:49:53 +0000

Great article, thanks for sharing. I-ve been reading the blog for half an hour and will be coming back. Thanks again.

C. Terol

By: alex

alex — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 14:18:26 +0000

i like the picture of henry clay used here

By: Bryan

Bryan — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 13:39:45 +0000

Sorry for my previous snark. It really is an excellent article.
I actually do have some real advice to add: Avoid jargon. It only hurts correctness, clarity, and propriety.
I work in information technology and I find that many of my colleagues don’t know how to talk to non-technically-minded folks. The biggest problem is that they use technical Jargon, acronyms and slang to explain things to people who don’t know the difference between VoIP and VPN, and who have no clue what is meant by the “bit bucket” or other IT slang.
Making sure that your use of jargon is appropriate to ALL members of your audience is essential. For instance, if you’re giving a presentation about a print marketing campaign to the marketing department head and the president of the company, don’t assume the president knows all of the printing terms you may be intimately familiar with.

By: P.M.Lawrence

P.M.Lawrence — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 07:38:20 +0000

How, without being snarky, do I tell the blogger that he split an infinitive in the very passage where he admits he might be making grammatical mistakes even in this article? In truth, he really did it, and it did indeed break the flow for me, so I do think he needs to know about it – but the way he has set it up it’s almost bound to appear snarky despite my best efforts.

By: matthew

matthew — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 00:42:53 +0000

Great article! Don’t agree completely with the advice on pathos versus logos for “evidence” in an arguement or debate. Do find it interesting that logos has been used to encourage utilizing pathos in rhetoric to persuade others to a point of view. Keep up the good work!

By: Joseph Kraft

Joseph Kraft — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:20:12 +0000

@Andrew
An appeal to you ethical sensibilities IS a pathos appeal. I agree that it is more sophisticated than appeals to base “mammalian emotions” but it is still a pathos appeal.

By: Joseph Kraft

Joseph Kraft — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:14:49 +0000

@Chad Rushing,
If you neglect the pathos in favor of the logos then you will lose the argument to the despot tugging at the heartstrings almost every time. I’m in favor of precise and correct logos but when an issue matters enough to attempt to persuade an audience; it also matters enough to take into account HOW they are likely to be persuaded.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:01:52 +0000

From the article:

“For example, let’s say you’re making the case to your state legislator that your state needs to devote more funds towards fighting childhood hunger. Instead of starting your speech or letter by spouting off a bunch of dry facts, it would be more persuasive to tell a story of a specific child who’s a victim of hunger. In your story, describe the conditions this child is living in–the smells, the sights, the sounds. Describe the pangs of hunger that gnaw on his stomach every night while he lies crying softly, curled in ball on a urine-soaked mattress.”

The balance between logos and pathos is difficult. When I hear a politician, preacher, or celebrity resort to pathos, I am immediately suspicious and viscerally turned off. Nowadays via mass media this kind of rhetoric, especially visual imagery accompanied by intense language devoid of actual meaning, inundates us constantly, goading our mammalian emotions as with a cattle prod.

I find an appeal to my ethical sensibilities first, basic logic second, and carefully restrained pathos last to be more persuasive.