Thursday, January 19, 2012
Rhetoric Blog 1
Online has the possibility of being a great source of rhetoric. You are able to post opinions on to your facebook page which opens up a discussion for friends and family members. You are also capable of using links to newspapers to prove why your belief is accurate.In addition to that you are able to tweet opinions and use hashtags to connect not only with people you know, but with other people who care for that topic. This form of rhetoric comes with limitations though. For one when you are online people tend to not see you as another human and attack your beliefs on a more personal level. As if you are wrong for seeing things differently instead of looking to see the arguments you present and whether or not they are accurate and can possibly be correct. A second limitation that we see online is that there is many people who are ignorant about the topic who just enter the discussion to bully people into believing that they are right even though they have no proof to back up their opinions. A third flaw is the only arguments that are used online is logical ones this is mainly due to the fact that newspapers articles only show the numbers and the data and most people use data to show they are right since you can not refute numbers. This makes the arguments less rhetorical since we are not creating our own arguments anymore, but relying on the facts presented before us.The last limitation in online rhetoric is that we use our arguments to win as if the person we are discussing an issue is our opponent not a fellow citizen with different opinion of an important societal issue.Rhetoric is meant to find common group and to try to better society, but with this modern view of it we see rhetoric used to win a battle. Even though online rhetoric can possibly be great it has many limitations that need to be addressed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree, the online world in theory, seems to be a great forum to help encourage rhetoric and civic life. With all the limitations you have mentioned above I do not see online rhethetoric as nearly effective as in person. The issue of winning an argument becomes the priority, leaving rhetoric behind. I'm not sure if the limitations can ever be completely addressed.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very well done definition of rhetoric online. You were very thorough with your explanations which made it interesting to read. The only thing I'd say to improve is with some more specific examples. The ones you used were very general and I think specifics would have exemplified your point even more so. If you used specific examples it would have elevated the blog from great to very great!
ReplyDeleteYou brought up some interesting points with which I agree. Cyber rhetoric can fall down a slippery slope of no return with the many arguments the internet has to offer. However, it is still a good way to express opinion on a topic as long as it is done right; something I wish you would have expanded on in this blog. All in all I do agree that greater society needs to focus more on having disscussions rather than debates.
ReplyDeleteVery true. Online rhetoric seems promising in theory, but the dehumanization of the rhetors online makes it less effective. I would agree that it's definitely better to stick to person-to-person interactions and other more personal forms of rhetoric when dealing with more serious issues. However, online rhetoric is great for light socialization/discussion with friends as you mention in talking about facebook/twitter. My only suggestion for you is to paragraph your writing. Maybe not completely necessary, but it just makes the really interesting things you're saying easier to follow and understand.
ReplyDelete