How did reading the others’ definitions of rhetoric affect
your thinking about your own definition? Did it change it? Why or why not?
I have read and commented on Holly Snider’s, Bela
Burns, and Grace deMeurisse’s definitions of rhetoric. Each of their posts had
some excellent and enlightening points. Below I will write a paragraph for each
post and discuss the impact it has had on my view of rhetoric.
Holly’s: In Holly’s blog post on the definition of
rhetoric, she really focused on how thinking rhetorically helps you write
excellent work. This really helped me expand my knowledge of rhetoric. In my
post I did not pay much attention to the writing part of rhetoric, but mainly
how to put it into action. By reading her post my definition did not change,
but it has been expanded by Holly’s great insights.
Bela’s: The persuasion part of rhetoric was really
brought into light in Bela’s blog post. She told of the benefits putting
rhetoric into action had in life’s situations. She explained that it helped in
negotiating and in persuading people with your grounded opinions. Before
reading her post persuasion was not something I thought of when hearing the
word rhetoric, so her definition has changed mine. I now look on rhetoric as
tool to get through life’s conflicting situations.
Grace’s: Grace’s blog post was very unique and
enlightening. She looked at rhetoric in a cultural and lingual way. She had points
on how rhetoric is different for every language, and looked upon differently in
other cultures. Her definition has definitely given me a larger picture of
rhetoric. The word rhetoric now goes beyond our culture and even though my definition
has not changed, it has become much vaster.
No comments:
Post a Comment