Popular in Rhetoric
Popular in English
This 3 page Class Notes was uploaded by Isabel Rubin on Thursday October 13, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to ENC3201 at Florida State University taught by in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 4 views. For similar materials see Rhetoric in English at Florida State University.
Reviews for Class notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 10/13/16
Descartes o Breaks away from religion and takes aim at system itself o “I think, therefore I am” the one thing of which I can be certain the fact that I have the ability to ask this question means that I exist the self is the only thing we know for sure use this one piece of information to reason forward uses it to illustrate that god exists o if I can think of a person more perfect then myself, then god must have instilled that thought in me o a thing or idea cannot have a quality that its cause didn’t have (e.g. if water boils, it has to be exactly as hot as the heat) o We as humans are imperfect. If following his causable ideas, the only thing we can conceive is something imperfect. Yet we can conceive of something that is perfect, meaning that something perfect must exist. Fallacy: We need the ideas of perfection to say that god exists, but we can’t talk about the idea of perfection without already saying god exists o In order to get to the Truth, we have to start at ground zero Similar to Plato that they are both trying to discover the absolute Truth, but disregards Plato’s method entirely Disagrees with Plato’s method of dialectic and reasoning to knowledge Plato o method involves discourse between people o Knowledge is collaborative Descartes o method involves self-reflection o Start from the thing that you can identify as true and then reason forward o Arguing against reliance on senses/the scholastic, aristatlilian view of rhetoric Classical rhetoricians argue that the major way we know is through the senses and experiences Feels senses are inherently fallible Since all of our current knowledge comes from associating knowledge with senses, we have to question all of it and start from the one thing we know we can unequivocally prove based on a more mathematical geometric way of thinking. How can we know something actually exists and that we can rely on our senses? Everyone perceives senses differently If you hurt your foot, you feel it in your brain Can’t trust senses for two reasons Senses can be deceived o Can sense things when we are dreaming too And everyone perceives them differently o Truth comes from the bible It is not a physical sensation o Taxes of the souls Taxonomy and discipline of virtue, wonder, love, hatred, desire, joy, sadness o Opposing classical rhetoric Rhetoric in the scholastic Aristotelian sense is flawed Based on individual thought rather than reasoning with others Looking back towards Plato’s emphasis on individuality and philosophizing for the sake of it o No real goal of rhetoric More focused on the way we think and create ideas Rhetoric=the way we create ideas Doesn’t actually call it rhetoric Like classical rhetoricians, creates a systematic way of thinking that allows people to generate knowledge Doesn’t term this way rhetoric In illustrating the existence of god, the fact that we can trust that god exist, is gained through his system of thinking He is showing us how that method works in order to persuade us that it is something we should consider Persuasion by enacting his own method, letting his own work function as an example that it actually does work Locke o Rhetoric is figurative speech meant to move and please Literal speech, like instruction, is not rhetoric o Rhetoric is the dressing up (like Cicero’s grand style) filled with description, metaphor, poetic language, etc. If goal is to minimize miscommunication and impreciseness of language, rhetoric exacerbates problem But as a people, we enjoy eloquence and being deceived too much to get rid of rhetoric (like women) Fell o Doesn’t comment about rhetoric, but we can infer o Women should be allowed to speak in church, aka in public Through education women become better Christians, and as a result of that it’s ok for women to be rhetoricians as long as it’s in the genre of religion Uses examples from bible that women have traditionally spoken in religious settings Quaker leaders can’t argue against No one should be stopped from saying something Interprets and deconstructs biblical passages from male church leaders about god not wanting women to speak o Fell’s view of rhetoric Offers an argument of who can use rhetoric and in what circumstances God is speaking through us Allows her to give argument for why women can speak Women can speak as servants of god, and being a servant of god does not make a woman less subservient to a man Rhetoric is effective in the way she selects her evidence to persuade her audience What does Fell tell us about rhetoric based on how we see Fell actually use Rhetoric? She gives an argument about who can use rhetoric and under what circumstances but using examples and evidence from the bible to persuade audience, therefore she tells us that evidence and audience consideration are important for rhetoric o Equality between social classes
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'