Pass the Blame

In that rhetoric calls for a dialogical approach, it is most appropriate to provide both an encomium and an invective to the subject.



Rhetoric, in itself, is the most useful tool within the human tool belt. It is used, both effectively and ineffectively, by everyone who is capable of communicating on this planet, from describing in detail how the dog ate the homework assignment to arguing political or ethical issues we see on a daily basis. Rhetoric is most difficult to define because it has so many facets and uses within a language. It can provide a person with the capability, when used appropriately, to persuade another individual into agreeing with them on any subject. According to the dictionary provided by Princeton University (worldnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn), rhetoric is "using language effectively to please or persuade" or "study of the technique and rules for using language effectively (especially in public speaking)." However, this dictionary also provides two more definitions of an opposite outlook. Rhetoric can also be defined as "high-flown style; excessive use of verbal ornamentation" and "loud and confused and empty talk." In the same breath, I can easily praise rhetoric, and, for the same reasons, compose an negative invective. The fact that a person can effectively persuade another into believing most anything is where the largest problem with rhetoric lies. When individuals use empty language to persuade, as the sophists were accused of, they begin treading on very dangerous ground. The easiest and most common example to use is the speeches of Adolf Hitler. His best quality was his charisma and ability to convince the masses by telling them what they wanted to hear, an effective, though not always moral, form of rhetoric. Keep in mind that the most useful tool is often also the most dangerous.