In Aristotle’s Rhetoric there are interesting examples of persuasion based on classification of human knowledge. His distinction of speaker, audience and speech reminded me modern theories of communication. His explanation on syllogisms made me recall the introductory course of logics I took in undergraduate school. It was interesting because I still clearly remember many things I learned in it. Being logical is the first requirement for any persuasion. So I think it is possible to use some basics of logic to help students comprehend the perplexity and importance of argumentation.
What I’m speaking about is not theoretical information but rather using famous examples that either proved to be irrefutable or demonstrate difficulties in building argumentation. Some of them are quite entertaining and easy to memorize. For instance, in the sentence “I lie” it is impossible to define whether this statement true or false. The simple logical problems could be helpful too such as true/false syllogisms. In fact, my comment mostly deals with adding to the variety of tasks and activities we can offer to students. I think logic is not bad option.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Irina,
I agree completely. Logic is too often taken for granted. It seems that logic and rhetoric are naturally interrelated. The writer or speaker who can only move the emotions is capable of generating momentary conviction in certain circumstances, but the rhetorician who employs sound logic (in addition to stylistic flourish) may actually change minds. I think I will also try to incorporate some basic elements of logic into the course -- at least an explanation of the syllogism and the difference between an argument's formal validity and objective truth. I think these types of issues need to be broached in a course that is explicitly concerned with effective argumetation.
Post a Comment