Rhetoric Final Questions Flashcards
What are facts and evidence?
Fact: something indisputably the case. Evidence: a body of facts offered to support or disprove a claim.
Chapter 18 speaks of “shareable arguments.” What are they, and why are they important to rhetoric?
Shareable arguments are based on publicly verifiable evidence. People are more likely to be persuaded when they can test facts and evidence themselves.
Chapter 19 talks about the importance of falsifiability in constructing arguments. What does it mean for an argument to be open to counter-evidence and refutation?
All good arguments should be open to counter-evidence. We should shy away from those that aren’t. If an argument can’t be challenged, then it won’t allow its weakness or falsehoods to be pointed out.
What’s the potential danger of inviting an audience to test what we’re saying? According to Chapter 20, what’s the potential benefit?
When an audience tests what we say, they might find problems big enough to undermine our claims. Inviting them to test shows we are willing to be corrected. Also, knowing where our arguments’ weak spots are can help us strengthen them.
What are fallacies, and why should we avoid them? Chapter 21 claims that “fallacy hunting” has pitfalls. What is “fallacy hunting” and what are its pitfalls?
Fallacies are reasoning mistakes that follow common patterns. We should avoid them because they lead ours and others’ reasoning astray. Fallacy-hunting aims to rood out errors in reasoning, but potentially causes us to listen only for the problems in an opponent’s argument. Analyzing claims requires more than spotting fallacious thinking.
Chapter 22 discuses kairos. What is it, and why is it so important to rhetoric? What two “right-nesses” does kairos concern itself with?
Kairos refers to a “definite time, a fulfilled time, or an opportune time for persuasion.” It pushes us to find time, place, and language that wake up peoples’ attention and interest. It concerns itself with right timing and proper measure.
Aristotle sorted rhetoric into three categories. Chapter 23 describes drawbacks to doing so. What are those three categories? What are potential drawbacks to their use?
Three basic patterns are deliberative, forensic, and epideictic. Deliberative focuses on the future. Forensic focuses on the past. Epideictic focuses on the present. A drawback of sorting this way is that it doesn’t always fit neatly into this category or that.
Chapter 24 talks about personality types or patterns. What are they? Of what rhetorical usefulness is understanding personality terms?
Personality types are patterns of personality, commonalities that large groups of people share. Knowing personality types can help a presenter fit his message to his audience. It can help him connect better with the people who are his audience, too.
Chapter 25 identifies three preoccupations we should let go of. What are those preoccupations?
The chapter calls us to let go of preoccupations with power, prestige, and possessions.
Some kinds of judgment are good and necessary. Some aren’t. What sort of judging does Chapter 26 warn against?
Chapter 26 warns against judging prematurely. It warns against judging without authority, too. And it warns against judging in ways that are not self-sacrificial.
Self-confidence and self-consciousness can be troublesome to our rhetoric. According to Chapter 27, how so?
At the heart of defensiveness is someone’s confidence being questioned. Those who puff up their chests tend to lash out when their “superiority” is challenged. Self-consciousness can be a problem in rhetoric, too. It can undermine an argument in an audience’s mind, even if the argument is a good one. No one wants to listen to someone talk constantly about how bad he is. it makes the audience thing he’s wasting their time.
Chapter 28 discusses confirmation bias. Why is it–and cognitive biases, generally–so problematic? Why are such biases so difficult to dislodge?
Confirmation bias is problematic because subconscious; it can influence us without our knowledge. It’s difficult to dislodge for a couple of reasons. One it’s hard to recognize its influence in ourselves. And two, our natural desire is to be right and not to be challenged.
What is curiosity? According to Chapter 29, what about it can hook an audience? If we find our own curiosity is weak, how can we strengthen it?
Curiosity is an expression of love for something. It’s an enthusiasm for learning about it. An audience can be hooked by a presenter’s passion for his subject. The presenter’s excitement is contagious. It stirs the audience to be excited about the subject, as well. There are a few ways to strengthen a weak curiosity. We can surround ourselves with curious people. We can make deliberative efforts to experience new things. We can spend time with those who’re enthusiastic about something we know little about.
“We may value creativity and novelty, but we shouldn’t pursue them for their own sake.” So says Chapter 30. Why not? What’s the problem with viewing creativity this way?
Jumping from one novelty to the next doesn’t make a lasting, beautiful rhetoric. This “clickbait” form of rhetoric does little more than attract momentary attention. it doesn’t do the audience any lasting good. It’s contrary to a rhetoric of love, which aims to serve people. Our creativity should capture attention, but that shouldn’t be its sole purpose. It should serve both God and neighbor.
Chapter 31 argues for rhetorical simplicity. What does it mean to declutter our rhetoric? How does focus figure into our speaking and writing?
We declutter and focus our rhetoric when we take out what’s unnecessary. That may be words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, or even pages. Trimming a presentation’s fat and focusing on its meat shows respect to an audience.
