In Defense of Rhetoric

Abstract

Persuasiveness should not be confused with correctness. This is the insight behind the objection that Logic has to Rhetoric. The number of people you persuade to vote your way or to buy your product has little or nothing to do with the merits of the reasons you are offering for doing so. You can persuade people to buy your product or support your position by intimidating them, or by appealing to their desire to please you or their fear of offending you. You can persuade them without necessarily convincing them that it really is the right position. Even if you do convince them, your argument for doing so may not be very good. This point becomes even more obvious when they are called upon to explain or defend their vote or purchase. They may have all sorts of problems responding to critical questions, and they may find that the reasoning that convinced them no longer works when they have to rely on it to convince someone else. The effectiveness of the rhetoric you used should not be confused with its logical correctness. Logic is not concerned with psychology, whereas that is just what seems the preoccupation of Rhetoric.KeywordsCritical ThinkingCapital PunishmentReal IssueDynamic LogicDeclarative SentenceThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.