Rhetoric definition

This site provides an accurate definition of rhetoric as “the study of effective speaking and writing. And the art of persuasion. And many other things.”, however this definition has plenty of room to be improved upon. I would instead choose to define rhetoric as simply the study of argumentation. Rhetoric certainly encompasses the studies of writing and speaking under this large umbrella, but a word’s general definition should illustrate only what a word is understood to mean and nothing more. Defining rhetoric differently in different contexts may be useful, but if one is to give a single definition for a word then it should be what that word is generally understood to mean and leave the elaboration to the works using the word which would need to explain themselves anyway if they wished to utilize the word outside of its more broad definition. It is in that vein that my definition makes the most sense because it is more or less a simplification of what the site suggested. Both the written word and oral communication in the context of persuasion fall under the category of argumentation. By using the word argumentation the definition encompasses the specific components inherent to the art without straying from its duty as a definition, and instead attempting to actually explore the subject. The site’s definition also excludes an important aspect of the study by defining rhetoric as “the study of effective speaking and writing.” I don’t doubt that the purpose of studying argumentation is in fact to learn how to do it more effectively, but some of the best lessons anyone learns about how to do something are also about how not to do it. Within the study of rhetoric plenty of rhetorical strategies and concepts are thoroughly examined and found to be ineffective, however the examination of these ideas is still critical to the subject because it allows rhetoricians to know what to avoid. Keeping this and the definition I have given in mind during class will help us to more thoroughly explore the subject by including this aspect of it. Having a simpler definition will also facilitate smoother communication by ensuring mutual understanding. Although I believe these reasons make my definition superior to the one given by the site, the site did still have some valuable information to offer. Rhetoric often requires knowledge of esoteric terminology and categorizations of the ways in which people construct their arguments. The site provides a useful resource by shedding some light on those areas of rhetoric through formal definitions and explanations of concepts and vocabulary that come up often in rhetoric. If used primarily for reference in that context in could certainly be a useful source, but despite its acknowledgement of the importance of reconciling what is being said with the various methods of saying it laid out by rhetoric, it does not provide much assistance in actually doing that. The site is useful for reference to the more formal and abstract elements of rhetoric, but the knowledge of how to use knowledge of the different types of argumentation in order to improve upon a position should be left to other sources.

Burton, Gideon. "The Forest of Rhetoric." Silva Rhetoricae:. Brigham Young University, n.d. Web. 01 Sept. 2015.