СЕМАНТИЧНІ ВІДТІНКИ КАТЕГОРІЇ ПЕРЕКОНАННЯ В РИТОРИЦІ

Abstract

The article deals with the semantic nuances of the category of persuasion in rhetoric. Based on the study of classical and modern works in the field of rhetoric, the distinction between conviction and persuasion as an influence on the understanding and influence on the will, which was characteristic of the Western classical philosophical tradition (G. Campbell, I. Kant, R. Whately), is emphasized. Thus conviction assumes actually influence by means of arguments, and persuasion both reasoned, and pathetic influence. In the 20th century in the concept of "new rhetoric" by Ch. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteka, these differences also lie in the nature of the audience (universal or particular) to which the speaker's argumentation is addressed. At the same time, they reconsider I. Kant's criterion "objective-subjective", because arguments aimed at a particular audience also have a meaning that goes beyond subjective belief. In D. O'Keefe's modern theory of persuasion, the distinction between conviction and persuasion remains at the level of the speaker's communicative ends, but does not mean a clear difference between the communicative means of achieving these ends. In the Ukrainian language there is only one term to denote this category, however, in the modern educational literature grasps the above-mentioned nuances in defining persuasion as characteristics of theoretical and practical activities, which indicates the move of the Ukrainian educational field in the stream of European traditions of rhetoric interpretation.