In chapter three we went on to discuss what
"rhetoric" actually was, and while we came up with multiple ways to
define rhetoric. The way that I was most able to identify with this art was
when I compared it to trials, mock trial, civic cases, and criminal law. They
all connect to rhetoric and being able to accurately speak in the right moment,
about the right the thing, and to the right people. Due to the fact that I am
able to connect rhetoric with something that I am passionate with it makes it
so much more clear to me.
Say we were in a courthouse and a man is being sentenced to death.
His entire life revolves around his lawyer's use of rhetoric. However, his
lawyer is in an art competition against the opposing lawyer, the competition
being who can speak the best to the jury. Hit an emotional appeal here; through
a little bit of logic there, and most importantly tell them at the right
moment. Feel the atmosphere of the audience and engage.
Both lawyers are put
into a position in which they have to listen to the other and hear what the
other is saying so as to respond accurately to the other. They have to listen
to learn and respond by doing such. Even though they already have notes and key
points to speak on they must wait on the most opportune moment to display their
information.
Not only do they have
to wait to display their information, but they also must go on to question
anything that is not clear. That's
what rhetoric is, learning how to listen and display information in the
appropriate manner. It is to learn from the person opposing you, because while
rhetoric may not be as serious as a man’s life resting on your shoulders. It most certainly teaches you about
understanding others and knowing when to speak and using your voice as a tool.