Political Rhetoric
1 Lecture 1 – introduction
The importance of political rhetoric
No politics without persuasion
Reason: uncertainty
Persuasion by speech vs. persuasion by force
The fundamental political skill?
What is rhetoric?
< Greek ‘retoriketekhne’
o Rhetor = speaker
o Tekhne = art
Studying rhetoric = learning the practical skills of persuasion
Studying rhetoric = studying the persuasiveness of speech
Not limited to spoken word (oratory)
o Written word
o Visuals
Political rhetoric
Many areas of rhetorical studies
o E.g. law, organization studies,…
o Persuasion in the political realm
o Not limited to politicians!
o “What makes a political speech persuasive (or not)?”
Diverse research field
Different backgrounds, different questions
o Linguistics (e.g. rhetorical figures)
o Psychology (e.g. emotions vs. the cognitive)
o Political science (e.g. questions of power)
o Communcation science (e.g. mass media)
Each with their own terminology & research methods
Difficulty: they don’t always talk to each other
This course: eclectic approach
1.1 History
Rhetoric, a contested notion
Words often associated with rhetoric: “mere”; “empty”
o Rhetoric is contrasted with reality
Association with danger
o Can people be persuaded of anything? (violence, misinformation)
At the same time: no democracy without free speech?
Rhetoric was central to ancient democracy
, Greece, 500 BC
From aristocracy to democracy
o Demos = people
o Ekklesia
Highly participatory system
o Status of being citizen comes with obligations
Rhetorical skills were important
Teachers: sophists
o ▪ Sophos = wisdom
▪ E.g. Gorgias, Protagoras
Culture of oral transmission
Different views of classical thinkers
Plato
Belief in one moral “truth”
o Allegory of the cave
o Only a small elite can see it
Rhetoric is empty and dangerous
o It can persuade most people of anything; a ‘rudderless boat’; “sophistries”
o Can do bad instead of good (death of his mentor Socrates)
“The Republic”
o Society should be based on reason
o Strict division: philosopher-kings; guardians and traders
Ideas were later criticized (e.g. Popper)
More sympathetic reading: argument for alternative type of rhetoric (dialectic)
o Cf. technocracy today
Aristotle
Student of Plato
More positive reading of rhetoric
o Man is a ‘political animal’
o ‘Good life’ is life in accordance with community (vs. Plato: natural state)
Rhetoric complements philosophical reasoning
o How should the best case be put, given the argument, evidence, audience?
o Best case is not always clear
“The art of rhetoric”
Disclaimer: exclusive notion of ‘citizen’
o Cf. importance of ‘enthymeme’
o Degree of permitted disagreement is limited
Cicero
Great orator of the Roman world
Treatises on rhetoric (e.g. “De Oratore”)
Like Aristotle, refuted sophism
o Understanding of topic comes first; then follows good speech
o But he himself was pragmatic
Persuasion is not about techniques but about the talent to adapt
,Rhetoric diminished when modern state emerged
Centralized, powerful authorities
Laws to be obeyed without discussion (monopoly of violence)
o Subordination of citizen assemblies to rules
Two thinkers (Hobbes and Rousseau)
o Contrasting interpretations of sovereign state
o Similar perception of danger of rhetoric
Hobbes
“Leviathan” (1651)
Pessimist about nature of human beings: uncertainty & competition driven by
passion/appetite
o Capable of reasoning (not like animals)
o But different interpretations of the same event; no shared morality
Rhetoric leads to even more confusion
o E.g. metaphors
o vs. ‘Perspicious words’
Rational thing to do: one-time “social contract”
o Appoint supreme power to bring civil piece
Rousseau
“Social contract” (1762)
Humans are ‘naturally good’ but modern society made them selfish
Return to harmony through agreement among citizens
o State is not a distant Leviathan; no external authority
o Collective citizen body remains in charge
o Obey the “General Will” (internal motivation)
General Will: not developed through rhetoric
o “Long debates bespeak the assendance of particular interests and the decline of the
state”
o Persuasion is essentially non-argumentative; appeals to individual’s conscience
Need for unanimity: small & highly exclusive state
o People identify with each other; shared sentiment from within
Cf. ‘dogmatic’ forms of speech today
Martin: politics vs political
“Why do so many people (and classical thinkers / political theorists) see rhetoric as
dangerous?”
Argument of James Martin (handbook): politics vs. the political
o Politics = regular activities taking place within the rules of the game
o The political = higher principles (what are the rules of the game?)
The political is only partially settled…
o Realization that things might be done differently
o Power relations can always change
… vs. philosophers who search for stable principles
Potential for chaos, disorder, crisis
, Dismissal of rhetoric is a symptom of that concern
Because rhetoric involves both politics & the political
o “Just rhetoric”: Mundane day -to -day -business
o “Speeches that changed the world”: efforts to establish new principles
o Most often in between
If thinker has sympathy for rhetoric (e.g. Aristotle), often limits (e.g. very exclusive public
sphere) to eliminate discussion about the political
Impossible to reconcile stability with inclusive rhetoric ?
1.2 Situating rhetoric
Language
Rhetoric uses language
Not all rhetoric is language
Not all language is rhetoric
Ideology
= Organized belief system (e.g. liberalism, communism)
But rhetoric is about assembly/construction of ideas (and delivery)
Ideology is a resource for rhetoric
Rhetoric can change (or create) ideologies
Discourse
Is also about how people ‘make meaning’ of things
Also deals with persuasion and power (cf. critical discourse analysis)
Discourse is broad and ungoing; rhetoric concentrates on situated encounters
2 Lecture 2 – classical rhetoric
Ancient rhetorical classifications and techniques – read chapter 1 (bb)
1. Occasions of speech
2. The issue
3. Discovery of the argument (ethos – pathos – logos)
4. Arrangement of the argument
2.1 Occasions of speech
Good rhetoric is context-dependent
Three “occasions” of speech
Sorts of speeches
Epideictic (ceremonial)
o Honour/commerate individuals
o Eg. wedding, funeral, rousing oration before battle
o GOAL: creating shared sentiment
o Typical arguments: praise or blame, focus on present
Forensic (judicial)
o Guilt or innocence
o Eg. defence in court
1 Lecture 1 – introduction
The importance of political rhetoric
No politics without persuasion
Reason: uncertainty
Persuasion by speech vs. persuasion by force
The fundamental political skill?
What is rhetoric?
< Greek ‘retoriketekhne’
o Rhetor = speaker
o Tekhne = art
Studying rhetoric = learning the practical skills of persuasion
Studying rhetoric = studying the persuasiveness of speech
Not limited to spoken word (oratory)
o Written word
o Visuals
Political rhetoric
Many areas of rhetorical studies
o E.g. law, organization studies,…
o Persuasion in the political realm
o Not limited to politicians!
o “What makes a political speech persuasive (or not)?”
Diverse research field
Different backgrounds, different questions
o Linguistics (e.g. rhetorical figures)
o Psychology (e.g. emotions vs. the cognitive)
o Political science (e.g. questions of power)
o Communcation science (e.g. mass media)
Each with their own terminology & research methods
Difficulty: they don’t always talk to each other
This course: eclectic approach
1.1 History
Rhetoric, a contested notion
Words often associated with rhetoric: “mere”; “empty”
o Rhetoric is contrasted with reality
Association with danger
o Can people be persuaded of anything? (violence, misinformation)
At the same time: no democracy without free speech?
Rhetoric was central to ancient democracy
, Greece, 500 BC
From aristocracy to democracy
o Demos = people
o Ekklesia
Highly participatory system
o Status of being citizen comes with obligations
Rhetorical skills were important
Teachers: sophists
o ▪ Sophos = wisdom
▪ E.g. Gorgias, Protagoras
Culture of oral transmission
Different views of classical thinkers
Plato
Belief in one moral “truth”
o Allegory of the cave
o Only a small elite can see it
Rhetoric is empty and dangerous
o It can persuade most people of anything; a ‘rudderless boat’; “sophistries”
o Can do bad instead of good (death of his mentor Socrates)
“The Republic”
o Society should be based on reason
o Strict division: philosopher-kings; guardians and traders
Ideas were later criticized (e.g. Popper)
More sympathetic reading: argument for alternative type of rhetoric (dialectic)
o Cf. technocracy today
Aristotle
Student of Plato
More positive reading of rhetoric
o Man is a ‘political animal’
o ‘Good life’ is life in accordance with community (vs. Plato: natural state)
Rhetoric complements philosophical reasoning
o How should the best case be put, given the argument, evidence, audience?
o Best case is not always clear
“The art of rhetoric”
Disclaimer: exclusive notion of ‘citizen’
o Cf. importance of ‘enthymeme’
o Degree of permitted disagreement is limited
Cicero
Great orator of the Roman world
Treatises on rhetoric (e.g. “De Oratore”)
Like Aristotle, refuted sophism
o Understanding of topic comes first; then follows good speech
o But he himself was pragmatic
Persuasion is not about techniques but about the talent to adapt
,Rhetoric diminished when modern state emerged
Centralized, powerful authorities
Laws to be obeyed without discussion (monopoly of violence)
o Subordination of citizen assemblies to rules
Two thinkers (Hobbes and Rousseau)
o Contrasting interpretations of sovereign state
o Similar perception of danger of rhetoric
Hobbes
“Leviathan” (1651)
Pessimist about nature of human beings: uncertainty & competition driven by
passion/appetite
o Capable of reasoning (not like animals)
o But different interpretations of the same event; no shared morality
Rhetoric leads to even more confusion
o E.g. metaphors
o vs. ‘Perspicious words’
Rational thing to do: one-time “social contract”
o Appoint supreme power to bring civil piece
Rousseau
“Social contract” (1762)
Humans are ‘naturally good’ but modern society made them selfish
Return to harmony through agreement among citizens
o State is not a distant Leviathan; no external authority
o Collective citizen body remains in charge
o Obey the “General Will” (internal motivation)
General Will: not developed through rhetoric
o “Long debates bespeak the assendance of particular interests and the decline of the
state”
o Persuasion is essentially non-argumentative; appeals to individual’s conscience
Need for unanimity: small & highly exclusive state
o People identify with each other; shared sentiment from within
Cf. ‘dogmatic’ forms of speech today
Martin: politics vs political
“Why do so many people (and classical thinkers / political theorists) see rhetoric as
dangerous?”
Argument of James Martin (handbook): politics vs. the political
o Politics = regular activities taking place within the rules of the game
o The political = higher principles (what are the rules of the game?)
The political is only partially settled…
o Realization that things might be done differently
o Power relations can always change
… vs. philosophers who search for stable principles
Potential for chaos, disorder, crisis
, Dismissal of rhetoric is a symptom of that concern
Because rhetoric involves both politics & the political
o “Just rhetoric”: Mundane day -to -day -business
o “Speeches that changed the world”: efforts to establish new principles
o Most often in between
If thinker has sympathy for rhetoric (e.g. Aristotle), often limits (e.g. very exclusive public
sphere) to eliminate discussion about the political
Impossible to reconcile stability with inclusive rhetoric ?
1.2 Situating rhetoric
Language
Rhetoric uses language
Not all rhetoric is language
Not all language is rhetoric
Ideology
= Organized belief system (e.g. liberalism, communism)
But rhetoric is about assembly/construction of ideas (and delivery)
Ideology is a resource for rhetoric
Rhetoric can change (or create) ideologies
Discourse
Is also about how people ‘make meaning’ of things
Also deals with persuasion and power (cf. critical discourse analysis)
Discourse is broad and ungoing; rhetoric concentrates on situated encounters
2 Lecture 2 – classical rhetoric
Ancient rhetorical classifications and techniques – read chapter 1 (bb)
1. Occasions of speech
2. The issue
3. Discovery of the argument (ethos – pathos – logos)
4. Arrangement of the argument
2.1 Occasions of speech
Good rhetoric is context-dependent
Three “occasions” of speech
Sorts of speeches
Epideictic (ceremonial)
o Honour/commerate individuals
o Eg. wedding, funeral, rousing oration before battle
o GOAL: creating shared sentiment
o Typical arguments: praise or blame, focus on present
Forensic (judicial)
o Guilt or innocence
o Eg. defence in court
