In Act III Scene II of Julius Caesar, Shakespeare composes essentially a war in rhetoric between the characters of Brutus and Mark Antony. Although for different purposes, both speeches given by Brutus and Mark Antony, pertaining to Caesar’s murder, contain poignant and skilled rhetoric in order to win over the citizens of Rome. Brutus bases his speech upon the appeal of ethos, being straight forward and honest with his audience, defending his ethical foundation. On the other hand, Antony’s speech is based upon the appeal of pathos and logos, delivering strong emotional and logical examples to support his argument, as well as dramatic effects with his use of striking pauses and props. Both orators use many combinations of rhetorical devices from Isocolon and Chiasmus to logical fallacies such as Ad Hominem, in order to influence the citizens of Rome into agreeing with their opinion of Caesar’s death.
Both start off with trying to get their credibility first, Antony wins in doing a better job because he worked harder in trying to get it. Pathos, the emotional appeal, is used most in both their speeches. Brutus asked rhetorical questions to try and stir up emotion in the crowd, “who is here so rude would not be a Roman?” (Act 3, Scene 2; 29) In asking these questions he knows people will begin to think about what he has to say. Antony also uses a great deal of emotion in his speech. He used repetition to try and sway the plebeians.
Aristotle had also extended the limits of knowledge in virtually every existing subject which are now deemed as the province of philosophy in today’s world (McGraw-Hill, 2008). Socrates (470-399 B.C.E.) was a stonemason with a very keen mind who lived in the fifth century B.C.E. Socrates had shared the same philosophical interests and practices of the Sophists who was by far one of the most brilliant debaters and was idolized by young Athenians everywhere. He had discovered the essential nature of knowledge, justice, beauty, goodness, and traits of good character as well as had the method of discovery in which he followed named after him which can now be referred to as the Socratic method (McGraw-Hill, 2008).
Employing these tools to the speeches showed that when writing their political speeches, politicians, including Mubarak, tend to utilize various linguistic tools, in order to convince their audience with their views, opinions and ideologies. However applying a CDA to these speeches is enough to reveal their hidden purposes in addition to their speaker's ideologies. Introduction CDA is a field of study which has paved the ways for the linguists to find out the hidden ideologies behind seemingly simple and plain words. Our words are never neutral; they carry the power that reflects language is no longer seen as merely reflecting out reality but also as central to creating reality (Fisk, 1994, Taiwo, 2007) Politics is a struggle for power, where every political action is prepared, manipulated in this regard language plays a crucial role. CDA is an essential device in investigating such language of politics, clarifying how politicians deconstruct texts to come up
Theme Analysis | The Euthyphro is primarily concerned with asking a Socratic question, "What is piety?" and working through arguments to arrive at a credible answer. There are however, several important and underlying arguments going on beneath the surface of the text. Plato has written this book in his usual dialectic fashion, which was also considered by himself and Socrates to be the only way at which philosophers could acquire knowledge and a soul good enough to commune with the Forms in death. The dialectic simply means question/answer format.
The persuasive strategy being discussed in this essay comes from the Greek philosopher Aristotle and is used in all three speeches. Aristotle’s rhetorical triangle divides persuasion into three categories called: Ethos, Logos, and Pathos. Ethos is used to create a credible or ethical appeal to the audience and attempts to convince them that the speakers’ character is likable and respected. Logos is used to create a logical appeal to the audience and persuades them by avoiding false statements and uses reasoning to support and substantiate their ideas. Pathos is used to creates emotional appeals in the audience using language to assist in enhancing their arguments and evoking emotional responses.
These advancements were most likely the basis for a sudden philosophical argument: What do we truly know? People wondered whether science was really giving us knowledge of reality. The quest for the answer to this question led to the development of these two schools of philosophy. Two of the most famous philosophers of epistemology are Rene Descartes and David Hume, the former being a rationalist, and the latter an empiricist. In this paper I will attempt to give an understanding of both rationalism and empiricism, show the ideas and contributions each of the men made to their respective schools, and hopefully give my personal reasoning why one is more true than the other.
The majority of Gillman’s article consists of inductive reasoning due to the fact that he provides example after example of what the reader could find. The rest of the article includes the credibility he tries to make for himself by providing a copious amount of examples which leads to the ethos element of his argument. Last but certainly not least is the pathos aspect of a rhetorical argument; Gillman creates various emotions throughout the entirety of the article. The majority of this article relies heavily on inductive reasoning, which is using many proven examples to prove a point and persuade someone to join your cause. Even the layout of the passage lends to inductive reasoning.
(10 minutes) 2. Using Powerpoint presentation, define and discuss Aristotle’s definitions of rhetoric along with its three main forms: Ethos (Credibility), or ethical appeal, means convincing by the character of the author. In other words, making yourself as a speaker into an authority on the subject of the speech, as well as someone who is likable and worthy of respect. Pathos (Emotional) means persuading by appealing to the reader's emotions. Language choice affects the audience's emotional response, and emotional appeal can effectively be used to enhance an argument.
In each work, Socrates the philosopher is in two ways center stage, first, as a lover of wisdom (sophia) and discussion (logos), and, second, as himself an inverter or disturber of erotic norms. Plato's views on love are a meditation on Socrates and the power his philosophical conversations have to mesmerize, obsess, and educate. In what follows, section 1 deals with the Lysis and Symposium. Sections 2–4 primarily with the Symposium alone. Section 5 deals with the Phaedrus.