Comparison and Contrast to Aristotle and Kenneth Burke's Ideas

The rhetorician analyzes the auditory modality and his pass and decides the best approach to take in persuading that audience to combine the message:

Aristotle emphasized the consideration of arguments, which are the form and centerfield of opinion. . . . There are three directions of persuasion available to a talker: the spend of his character to make his public lecture credible, the hullabaloo of desired emotions in the audience, and create or apparent proof (Aristotle 620).

Although McKeon says that for Aristotle it was the audience which determined the particular mode or modes of persuasion suited to a particular speech, in fact it is the verbaliser himself who must assess the audience and select the appropriate mode or modes. That is the crucial point at which the driveing powers of the speaker come into play. Certainly, the speech itself must include persuasive elements, barely if the speaker's debate fails at the mode selection stage, the effectiveness of the speech will more likely be limited.

In new(prenominal) lyric poem, Aristotle based his rhetorical analysis on the logic and reason of the speaker, not of the audience. Despite the fact that the very purpose of conduct was happiness which was in turn based on reason and the golden mean, apparently Aristotle felt that it was acceptable and even needful that an effective speaker would take full advantage of whatever available inroads with which the audience might provide him. If the speaker was of spunky mora

As Stumpf writes, Aristotle saw words as the basic building block not scarcely of rhetoric but of all science:

burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. tender York: Prentice-Hall, 1952.

At the same time, there is no doubt that bump off, in spite of his great contrast with Aristotle in terms of style and use of rhetorical tools, has great admiration for Aristotle. In A Grammar of Motives, bump off writes, defending Aristotle from claims that his rhetoric was "mystical" because of its idealistic nature:

The virtually important thing about science is therefore the dustup in which it is formulated.

Scientific language must indicate as precisely as possible what constitutes the distinctive subject offspring of a science, and it must describe why things act the counselling they do. Logic, then, is a study of words or language. . . . Aristotelian logic is the study of the thought for which words are signs (Stumpf 88).

l standing, that would surely help his effort to persuade the audience. However, just as Aristotle emphasise the need for proof or apparent proof, obviously if the audience believed the speaker was of high moral character when he was not, the omit of character would not hurt the speaker as yearn as the audience's false impression of him remained.

The analysis is anything but "mystical,: Indeed, it is wholly realistic, involving the usual Aristotelian concern with action, as when he refers homosexual actions to seven causes: chance, nature, compulsion, habit, reason, anger and desire--showing how these commonplaces likewise offer resources for the orator to exploit, or in his selection of metaphor, antithesis, and actualization . . . as the major rhetorical devices of the orator (Burke Grammar 292).

As much as he admires and defends Burke against charges of mysticism, however, Burke himself seems all to willing to delve into the mystical in his analysis of the "transcendent state of 'pre-motion'" (Burke Grammar 294), related to trances, In addition, Burke appears to have no
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.