These last 5 chapters have really given me a lot to think about. There are so many instances in daily life where we encounter different methods of rhetoric without even realizing it. There is the illusive concept of Kairos; illusive for its nature of being most identifiable after it has past. Or the effects that new technologies have on those who were born in the last 30 years, during the swell of inventions. However, the most noticeable aspect of rhetoric in our daily culture is the way we use language everyday, either to gain something or to argue a point. In this way, modern rhetoric is sublimely different than the original ways of the Greeks. Their ancient methods and beliefs have mostly been lost to most people nowadays. Most notably is what John Stewart pointed put about CNN's show, Crossfire. The people on that show just yell at each other, with no apparent care about actually being heard. Argument is no longer about listening to what your opposed has to say and possibly seeing things from their perspective. Recently, it seems to be about yelling your opinions at someone until you're blue in the face, forcing them to believe what you believe.
Social medial has made this much easier, you can put your opinions out into the online void and sit back and wait for the responses to roll in. You could say whatever you want with little to no repercussions; the web has made people no longer accountable for what they say. Obviously, the ancients never had to deal with this, so it is a whole new form of rhetoric that has no set rules or boundaries.
Even so, people are like that face to face. They will say what they want when they want, even if it is offensive or ill timed. To that end, Kairos is a huge factor in both modern and ancient rhetoric. However, I feel as though there are instances where Kairos can be bad. You wait for that perfect moment, and when you see it pass you lament about missing it instead of going along with the new topic. Often, you try so hard to recreate it that you effectively ruin the flow of conversation.
Social medial has made this much easier, you can put your opinions out into the online void and sit back and wait for the responses to roll in. You could say whatever you want with little to no repercussions; the web has made people no longer accountable for what they say. Obviously, the ancients never had to deal with this, so it is a whole new form of rhetoric that has no set rules or boundaries.
Even so, people are like that face to face. They will say what they want when they want, even if it is offensive or ill timed. To that end, Kairos is a huge factor in both modern and ancient rhetoric. However, I feel as though there are instances where Kairos can be bad. You wait for that perfect moment, and when you see it pass you lament about missing it instead of going along with the new topic. Often, you try so hard to recreate it that you effectively ruin the flow of conversation.
I found your point about accountability to be very interesting; certainly people do view the internet as a place to say things without repercussion. Beyond semi-anonymity (though we are often not as anonymous we would like to think), could another contributing factor be unconscious through the lack of face to face contact, sort of like with road rage? However, I do feel that you could have focused more on a single point on your post.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more with your perspective on modern debates. It doesn't seem like people really try to listen to what others are saying; they are just waiting for their turn to talk. I have been listening to a podcast recently that covers debate topics. The two sides of the debate really do end up yelling at each other, and nothing is ever accomplished. I liked your perspective of kairos as well, but you may been better off to just stick to one of these two ideas.
ReplyDeleteI do think that the internet is causing a massive evolution in the way of argument, due to that anonymity that we can get. Just as our vocabulary is being altered, our mannerisms and our style in which we speak to others is changing as well as a result. For better or for worse, we have to adapt to stay rhetorically relevant.
ReplyDelete