Academic literature on the topic 'Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric"
1
Talaue, Gilbert Macalanda. "Aristotle's Rhetorical Triangle in Advertising." Journal of Media Management and Entrepreneurship 2, no. 2 (July 2020): 54–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jmme.2020070104.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to validate the influence of Aristotle's rhetorical triangle—ethos, pathos, and logos—to the behavior of Saudi Arabian consumers, focusing particularly on consumer product. Quantitative and qualitative methods including descriptive research design were used. Two hundred respondents participated in the study. Results shows that age has impact to influence respondent's preference of Aristotle's rhetorical appeals. However, educational attainment has no influence on respondents' behavior towards Aristotle's rhetorical appeals. Fifty-seven percent of the respondents perceived ethos appeal as the most effective appeal of persuasion. This finding could be due to culture, since Saudis valued trust and credibility. Entities that might be affected directly or indirectly of the findings will give them an idea on how to reach and persuade the target audiences. The classical Aristotle's rhetorical triangle is the ancient art of persuasion still remains useful and applicable for the communication.
2
Louden, Robert B. "Aristotle’s Rhetoric." Ancient Philosophy 16, no. 1 (1996): 241–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/ancientphil199616136.
Full text
3
Meyer, Michel. "Aristotle’s Rhetoric." Topoi 31, no. 2 (September 11, 2012): 249–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11245-012-9132-0.
Full text
4
Poster, Carol. "Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric." Ancient Philosophy 21, no. 2 (2001): 502–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/ancientphil200121236.
Full text
5
Dow, Jamie. "Proof-Reading Aristotle’s Rhetoric." Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 96, no. 1 (January 1, 2014): 1–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/agph-2014-0002.
Full text
6
Rizvi, Sajjad H. "Aristotle’s Rhetoric in the East." American Journal of Islam and Society 27, no. 2 (April 1, 2010): 117–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.35632/ajis.v27i2.1334.
Full textAbstract:
The Late Antique Aristotelian tradition inherited by the world of earlyIslam in the Near East considered the Rhetoric an integral part of one’straining in logic and reasoning. Thus far, however, there has been little academicinterest in it, apart from Deborah Black’s ground-breaking monographpublished some two decades ago and the recent edition in MarounAouad’s translation and study of Ibn Rushd’s commentary on it. Vagelpohl’srevised Cambridge dissertation is a careful historical and linguisticstudy of its translation and naturalization in Syriac (less so) and Arabiclearned culture in the Near East. As such, he considers the text a case studythat raises wider questions about the whole process of the translation movementthat, after a relative absence of interest, is again inspiring a new vogueof academic literature.Since translation is a process of cultural exchange, it is important to payattention to details and formulations. The choice of the Rhetoric requiressome justification, as Vagelpohl admits, for two reasons: (a) the Aristotelian text was not that significant in antiquity; more practical manuals were morewidely used and taught, and (b) the Arabic tradition distinguished betweentwo traditions of rhetoric, an indigenous genre of balaghah (and bayan) thatdrew upon classics of the Arabic language and was essential for trainingpreachers and functionaries, and a more philosophical and Hellenizingkhitabah represented by the Aristotelian text and its commentary, such asthe one by Ibn Rushd. Clearly the former tradition dominated, for even a cursoryexamination of the manuscript traditions and texts in libraries attests tothis imbalance. However, Vagelpohl argues that the challenges posed by thetext reveal strategies and approaches used by the translators to deal with thecultural exchange that may assist our understanding of the wider translationmovement ...
7
Castañeda, Ana Jimena Casillas. "Aristotle’s Rhetoric in Trump’s Hate Speech." OALib 03, no. 09 (2016): 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1102916.
Full text
8
Rapp, Christof. "Fallacious Arguments in Aristotle’s Rhetoric II.24." History of Philosophy and Logical Analysis 15, no. 1 (April 5, 2012): 122–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.30965/26664275-01501006.
Full textAbstract:
Just as Aristotelian dialectic sharply distinguishes between real and fallacious arguments, Aristotelian rhetoric distinguishes between real and fallacious enthymemes. For this reason Aristotle’s Rhetoric includes a chapter – chapter II.24 – that is exclusively devoted to what Aristotle calls “topoi” of fallacious enthymemes. Thus, the purpose of this chapter seems to be equivalent to the purpose of the treatise Sophistici Elenchi, which attempts to give a complete list of all possible types of fallacious arguments. It turns out that, although the Rhetoric’s list of fallacious types of rhetorical arguments basically resembles the list from the Sophistici Elenchi, there also are some striking differences. The paper tries to account for the relation between these two, more or less independent, Aristotelian approaches to the phenomenon of fallacious arguments. Can one of these two lists be seen as the basic or original one? And what is the point in deviating from this basic list? Are all deviations occasioned by the specific contexts of the rhetorical use on the one hand, and the dialectical on the other? Or do the two lists display different (or even incoherent) logical assumptions? Even an only tentative answer to this set of questions will help to clarify another but closely related scholarly problem, namely the relation between the Rhetoric’s list of topoi for real enthymemes and the Topics’ list of topoi for real dialectical arguments. It will also help to account for the general place of fallacious arguments within Aristotle’s dialectic-based approach the rhetoric.
9
Cichocka, Helena. "On the Reception of Aristotle’s Rhetoric in Byzantium." Peitho. Examina Antiqua, no. 1(3) (February 11, 2013): 231–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/pea.2012.1.11.
Full textAbstract:
The paper deals with the reception of Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric(Rhet. I 1355b26–27) in several Byzantine commentators of Hermogenes’and Aphthonius’ treatises. A justification of critical interpretationof this definition is to be found in the commentaries of Troilus and Athanasius(4th/5th century) as well as Sopatros (6th century) and Doxapatres(11th century), Maximus Planudes (13th/14th century) and several anonymouscommentators. The Byzantine tradition has found Aristotle’s definitionof rhetoric to be all too theoretical and insufficiently connected topractical activity, which Byzantium identified with political life.
10
Crider, Scott. "Passions and Persuasion in Aristotle’s Rhetoric (Jamie Dow)." American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 90, no. 4 (2016): 754–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/acpq2016904101.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric"
1
Nelzén, Amanda. "Aristotle on social media? : Investigating non-profit organizations’ usage of persuasive language in their posts on Twitter and Facebook." Thesis, Linnéuniversitetet, Institutionen för språk (SPR), 2018. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-70001.
Full textAbstract:
This study investigates how non-profit organizations market their organizations and persuades their audience on two different social media platforms. The aim is to examine four non-profit organizations’ use of persuasive language in their Facebook and Twitter posts. in their Facebook and Twitter posts on their social media pages. The aim is to understand if, how and what linguistic means was are used in the posts through Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric. His theory consists of the three appeals: ethos, logos and pathos. These three appeals all holds a number of individual features. with a perspective from classic rhetoric, namely Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric. The persuasion was examined using Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric and its appeals ethos, logos, and pathos. The research was carried out by classifying the posts by the three appeals and their features. These defined what linguistic means were used and how. All three appeals are equally important when persuading an audience public through a text as they are necessary to raise an understanding and interest to the text’s focus. Aristotle argued that when including all three appeals, the text has reached its full extent potential of persuasion. The appeals have their unique attributes and may also persuade when used individually. The An author’s credibility and trust applies to the appeal ethos, logic and reasoning in a of the text applies to logos, and a text that moves its reader’s emotions applies to pathos. The research resulted that aWhether a text’s length matters for its persuasion through a comparison of the two social media platformshas also been examined through comparing the two social media platformsw. Non-profit organizations do not strive for any profit which make it a challenge for them how to market persuade their organization audience in order and actually be able to be able to continue their work. Many of the posts researched included the appeal pathos which aim mainly to evoke emotions with the readers.
2
Dow, Jamie P. G. "The role of emotion-arousal in Aristotle’s Rhetoric." Thesis, University of St Andrews, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/10023/501.
Full textAbstract:
The principal claim defended in this thesis is that for Aristotle arousing the emotions of others can amount to giving them proper grounds for conviction, and hence a skill in doing so is properly part of an expertise in rhetoric. We set out Aristotle’s view of rhetoric as exercised solely in the provision of proper grounds for conviction (pisteis) and show how he defends this controversial view by appeal to a more widely shared and plausible view of rhetoric’s role in the proper functioning of the state. We then explore in more detail what normative standards must be met for something to qualify as “proper grounds for conviction”, applying this to all three of Aristotle’s kinds of “technical proofs” (entechnoi pisteis). In the case of emotion, meeting these standards is a matter of arousing emotions that constitute the reasonable acceptance of premises in arguments that count in favour of the speaker’s conclusion. We then seek to show that Aristotle’s view of the emotions is compatible with this role. This involves opposing the view that in Rhetoric I.1 Aristotle rejects any role for emotion-arousal in rhetoric (a view that famously generates a contradiction with the rest of the treatise). It also requires rejecting the view of Rhetoric II.2-11 on which, for Aristotle, the distinctive outlook involved in emotions is merely how things “appear” to the subject.
3
Upadhyay, Lauren E. "Souvenirs du temps le jeu du pseudo-recit dans Souvenirs du triangle d'or /." unrestricted, 2007. http://etd.gsu.edu/theses/available/etd-11282007-213221/.
Full textAbstract:
Thesis (M.A.)--Georgia State University, 2007.Eric Le Calvez, committee chair; Bruno Braunrot, committee member. Electronic text (58 p.) : digital, PDF file. Description based on contents viewed Jan. 29, 2008; title from file title page. Includes bibliographical references (p. 56-58).
4
Ramos, Cleonice Men da Silva. "Revistas impressas do mundo dos negócios: retórica e semiótica em entrelaçamentos discursivos." Universidade de São Paulo, 2012. http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/8/8142/tde-14012013-123423/.
Full textAbstract:
Este trabalho tem por objetivo investigar produções argumentativopersuasivas e efeitos de sentido depreensíveis de textos impressos veiculados nas revistas do mundo dos negócios EXAME, Época NEGÓCIOS e ISTOÉ Dinheiro. Em especial, interessa-nos o pensamento de Mestre Aristóteles: é pelo discurso que persuadimos, sempre que demonstramos a verdade ou o que parece ser a verdade. Considera-se a tríade aristotélica éthos, páthos, lógos. Modernamente, esses componentes retóricos são representados no ato comunicativo pela relação entre as três instâncias: o orador (enunciador), o auditório (enunciatário) e o discurso. A argumentação é ferramenta imprescindível da Retórica e mantém presença, em escalas distintas, em todos os textos/discursos. O processo argumentativo não é fundado no vazio: há sempre um propósito e o envolvimento de mais de um indivíduo. Argumenta-se para alcançar consenso sobre divergências em determinado ponto de vista; para confirmar e reforçar crenças e valores radicados em um indivíduo ou em um grupo específico; para, enfim, por meio de discurso dado como eficaz, obter a adesão do auditório: convencer ou persuadir o outro. A constatação de produções argumentativo-persuasivas recorrentes nos textos das revistas remete a certa imagem que o orador (enunciador) faz do seu auditório/enunciatário-leitor: o páthos, reconhecido como imagem da disposição, estado de espírito da instância de recepção, concretizada em sujeito discursivo do universo de sentido da esfera social de negócios empresariais. Com os conceitos da Nova Retórica, firma-se fortemente o prestígio do auditório particular no processo argumentativo-persuasivo. Ao considerar as produções discursivas voltadas a esse auditório específico, a pesquisa adentra os estudos das paixões que modalizam sujeitos sociais, inseridos nessa esfera de sentido delimitada: a corporativoempresarial.This work aims at showing argumentative-persuasive techniques observed in texts of the printed versions of EXAME, Época NEGÓCIOS and ISTOÉ Dinheiro, magazines from the corporate business discursive sphere. In special, we are interested in the thought of Aristotle: it is through discourse that we persuade, when we show the truth or what appears to be the truth. The Aristotelian triad éthos, páthos, lógos, which in modern times is represented by the relation of the instances of the orator (enunciator), the audience (enunciatee-reader), and the discourse is examined at length. Argumentation, an indispensable tool of Rhetoric, can be found in different levels in all texts/discourses. The argumentative process is not grounded in the void: there is always a purpose and involvement of more than one individual. The argumentation process intends to reach a consensus about some divergent points of view; to confirm and strengthen beliefs and values deeply rooted in an individual or a group; to hold, in short, the audience´s adherence through a discourse considered effective: convincing or persuading other people. The findings of recurrent argumentative-persuasive productions in the texts of magazines result in an apprehension by the orator/enunciator of certain audience/enunciatee-reader´s image: the páthos, recognized as the image of disposition, the inclination of the instance reception, materialized in the subject of discourse of the social sphere of corporate business. With the New Rhetoric concepts, the prestige of a particular audience takes deep roots in the argumentative-persuasive process. When considering the discursive productions directed to a specific audience, this work engages the study of the passions that modalize social subjects belonging to this restricted meaning sphere of meaning: corporate business.
5
Hsu, Chin-yun, and 徐金雲. "The “Pragmatic Gaps” in Aristotle’s Rhetoric -- An Inquiry from the Perspective of Contemporary Informal Logic." Thesis, 2010. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/50529801132317954464.
Full textAbstract:
博士東海大學
哲學系
98
Abstract This study attempts to demonstrate the “pragmatic gaps” in Aristotle's enthymeme and pisteis. The author uses the “CBVK” system and a special software system, the “araucaria”, proposed by Douglas Walton and Frans van Eemeren in their pragma-dialectical theory, to identify the gaps. She finds that the “gaps” in practical argument not only manifest on the propositional level (i.e., the “used” or “needed” assumptions by Robert Ennis), but also reside in the human mind as a subjective-activate component, and therefore serve various non-propositional functions. The author closely reads Aristotle's Rhetoric in light of this argument. She further asserts that the subjective-activate component of pragmatic gaps in Aristotle's rhetorical argument amounts to the so-called “practical wisdom” (phronesis), or in J-P Vernant and Detienne word, “mêtis”. Finally, the study attempts to build a pragmatic rhetorical model which combines “practical wisdom” and formal operational procedures that characterize Aristotle’s unique rhetorical argument.
Books on the topic "Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric"
1
Gottlieb, Paula. Aristotelian Feelings in the Rhetoric. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198817277.003.0010.
Full textAbstract:
Feelings play an important role in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, but the discussion of them is scanty. A longer discussion is to be found in Aristotle’s Rhetoric, but as Irwin points out, there are important differences between the context and content of the two works. I consider how far the discussion of the feelings in Aristotle’s Rhetoric can be used to elucidate the feelings mentioned in the Nicomachean Ethics. I conclude by contrasting Aristotle’s views about feelings with those of Hobbes, arguing that the clash between Aristotelian naturalism and Hobbesian voluntarism shows up even in their respective accounts of the passions.
2
Scott, Dominic. Listening to Reason in Plato and Aristotle. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198863328.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
Focusing on Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, this book compares their views on the persuasiveness of moral argument: how far did they think it could reach beyond a narrow circle of believers and influence people more generally? Answering this question requires a wide–ranging approach, which examines their views on such topics as rationality, moral psychology, rhetoric, education, and gender. The first part of the book shows that for Plato certain kinds of argument are beyond the reach of most people, specifically arguments that make appeal to transcendent Forms. But he still thought that there is another level of argument, restricted to human psychology and politics, which could have a much wider appeal, especially if supplemented by the appropriate rhetoric. The second half of the book turns to the Nicomachean Ethics to determine Aristotle’s views about the reach of moral argument, as well as its purposes. He is certainly very restrictive when it comes to the kinds of argument pursued in the work itself, proposing to talk only to those who are mature in years and well brought up. Like Plato, however, he also allows for the possibility of another type of discourse, which is more rhetorical in nature and could benefit those who are less mature. Though mainly focused on the Republic and Nicomachean Ethics, this book also examines relevant passages from Plato’s Laws and Aristotle’s Politics.
3
Moran, Richard. Artifice and Persuasion. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190633776.003.0003.
Full textAbstract:
Aristotle is the first philosopher to give sustained attention to metaphor, and this paper is a close reading of the discussion of metaphor his Rhetoric. Aristotle’s remarks on metaphor combine a traditional philosophical mistrust of metaphor and an appreciation of its indispensability in the context of public argument and persuasion. The discussion concentrates on two related questions. First, in the context of persuasion, how should we understand Aristotle’s insistence that successful metaphor achieves its effect in part by “setting something before the eyes” of its audience? And second, why is it thought important to the persuasive effect of a good metaphor that its artfulness or artifice be concealed from its audience? The paper seeks to understand together the role of the imagistic in thinking about metaphor and the idea of “the art that conceals art.”
4
Mayhew, Robert. Aristotle's Lost Homeric Problems. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198834564.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
This volume consists of a set of studies focused on various aspects of a relatively neglected subject: a lost work of Aristotle entitled Homeric Problems. Most of the evidence for this lost work consists mainly of ‘fragments’ surviving in the Homeric scholia (comments in the margins of the medieval manuscripts of the Homeric epics, mostly coming from lost commentaries on these epics). But other sources have been neglected. The book has three parts. The first deals with preliminary issues: the relationship of this lost work to the Homeric scholarship that came before it, and to Aristotle’s comments on the Homeric epics in his extant Poetics; the evidence concerning the possible titles of this work; a neglected early edition of these fragments. In the second part, our knowledge of the Homeric Problems is expanded through an examination in context of quotations from (or allusions to) Homer in Aristotle’s extant works, and specifically in the History of Animals, the Rhetoric, and Poetics 21 (to each of which a chapter is devoted). Part III consists of four studies on select (and in most cases neglected) fragments. The volume intends to show (inter alia) that Aristotle in the Homeric Problems aimed to defend Homer against his critics, but not slavishly and without employing allegorical interpretation.
5
Price, A. W. Varieties of Pleasure in Plato and Aristotle. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198805762.003.0005.
Full textAbstract:
It is a familiar contrast between Plato and Aristotle that Plato identifies pleasure with a process of replenishment, Aristotle with an activity (or quality of an activity) that contains its end within itself. It complicates the contrast that the Philebus does not actually insist on any single account, whereas the Rhetoric invokes the Platonic conception, but then extends it indefinitely. Aristotle’s discussions of pleasure in the Ethics can be interpreted as being of a piece, and as applying to a wide range of perceptions and activities. However, a distinction between being glad to be acting in some way and enjoying so acting would permit a more nuanced understanding of pleasure, and a more plausible view of ethical virtue.
6
Brudholm, Thomas. Hatred Beyond Bigotry. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190465544.003.0004.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter ponders the value of a focused conceptual examination of hatred for the combating of hate. A common argument found in much scholarship on hate crime and hate speech is that the term “hate” is misleading, and that bias or prejudice does a better job. However, this assertion is generally based on scanty consideration as to the concept of hatred itself. In order to qualify the conversation about hatred today, the chapter returns to Plato’s conceptualization of misology in the Phaedo and Aristotle’s account of hatred in the Rhetoric. This exploration among other things shows that there is a long tradition for thinking about certain forms of hatred as prejudice, but also that hatred can be approached as a reasonable and reason responsive feeling, rather than simply irrational and bad. The chapter mobilizes these philosophical readings for the purpose of reconsidering the question whether “hate” is indeed a misnomer.
7
Kristjánsson, Kristján. Virtuous Emotions. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198809678.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
Aristotelian virtue ethics has gained momentum within latter-day moral theorizing. Many people are drawn towards virtue ethics because of the central place it gives to emotions in the good life; after all, Aristotle says that emotions can have an intermediate and best condition proper to virtue. Yet nowhere does Aristotle provide a definitive list of virtuous emotions. In the Rhetoric, Aristotle does analyse a number of emotions. However, many emotions that one would have expected to see there fail to get a mention, and others are written off rather hastily as morally defective. Whereas most of what goes by the name of ‘Aristotelian’ virtue ethics nowadays is heavily reconstructed and updated Aristotelianism, such exercises in retrieval have not been systematically attempted with respect to his emotion theory. The aim of this book is to offer a revised ‘Aristotelian’ analysis and moral justification of a number of emotions that Aristotle either did not mention (such as awe, grief, and jealousy), relegated, at best, to the level of the semi-virtuous (such as shame), made disparaging remarks about (such as gratitude) or rejected explicitly (such as pity, understood as pain at another person’s deserved bad fortune). It is argued that there are good ‘Aristotelian’ reasons for understanding those emotions either as virtuous or as indirectly conducive to virtue. The book begins with an overview of Aristotle’s ideas on the nature of emotions and of emotional value, and it ends with an account of Aristotelian emotion education.
8
Leo, Russ. Tragedy as Philosophy in the Reformation World. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198834212.001.0001.
Full textAbstract:
Tragedy as Philosophy in the Reformation World examines how a series of influential poets, theologians, and humanist critics turned to tragedy to understand providence and agencies human and divine across diverse Reformation milieux. Rejecting familiar assumptions about tragedy, crucial figures like Philipp Melanchthon, David Pareus, Lodovico Castelvetro, John Rainolds, and Daniel Heinsius developed distinctly philosophical ideas of tragedy, irreducible to drama or performance, inextricable from rhetoric, dialectic, and metaphysics. In its proximity to philosophy, tragedy afforded careful readers crucial insight into causality, probability, necessity, and the terms of human affect and action. With these resources at hand, Reformed theologians, poets, and critics produced daring and influential theses on tragedy between the 1550s and the 1630s, all directly related to pressing Reformation debates. And while some poets employed tragedy to render sacred history palpable with new energy and urgency, others marshalled a precise philosophical notion of tragedy directly against spectacle and stage-playing, endorsing anti-theatrical theses on tragedy inflected by Aristotle’s Poetics. Uncovering a tradition of Reformation poetics in which tragedy often opposes performance, the work also explores the impact of these scholarly debates on more familiar works of vernacular tragedy, illustrating how William Shakespeare’s Hamlet and John Milton’s 1671 poems take shape in conversation with philosophical and philological investigations of tragedy. Tragedy as Philosophy in the Reformation World demonstrates how Reformation took shape in poetic as well as theological and political terms while simultaneously exposing the importance of tragedy to the history of philosophy.
Book chapters on the topic "Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric"
1
Green, Lawrence D. "Aristotle’s Rhetoric and Renaissance Views of the Emotions." In Renaissance Rhetoric, 1–26. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 1994. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-23144-7_1.
Full text
2
Fortenbaugh, William W. "On the Composition of Aristotle’s Rhetoric." In Λhnaika, 165–88. Wiesbaden: Vieweg+Teubner Verlag, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-12216-6_9.
Full text
3
Gastaldi, Silvia. "Envy and Rivalry in Aristotle’s Rhetoric." In The Dark Side: Philosophical Reflections on the “Negative Emotions”, 65–80. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55123-0_5.
Full text
4
Vagelpohl, Uwe. "Reading and Commenting on Aristotle’s Rhetoric in Arabic." In Reading the Past Across Space and Time, 165–84. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55885-5_9.
Full text
5
Rubinelli, Sara. "Aristotle’s Topoi and Idia as a Map of Discourse." In Topologies as Techniques for a Post-Critical Rhetoric, 17–30. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51268-6_2.
Full text
6
Cohen de Lara, Emma. "Aristotle’s Rhetoric and the Persistence of the Emotions in the Courtroom." In Aristotle on Emotions in Law and Politics, 385–99. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66703-4_18.
Full text
7
Pascale, Miriam. "Ira e compassione. Fonti aristotelico-tomiste di Decameron VIII 7." In Intorno a Boccaccio / Boccaccio e dintorni 2019, 115–28. Florence: Firenze University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.36253/978-88-5518-236-2.07.
Full textAbstract:
This essay aims to examine the philosophic sources behind the representation of passions in Boccaccio’s tale of the scholar and the widow (Decameron VIII 7). If the definition of anger is attributable to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, I believe that it is possible to assume that the description of compassion, only mentioned in the moral treatise, derives instead from the Aristotle’s Rhetoric, where compassion is seen as a passion opposed to a kind of wrath, that is, indignation. The paper also investigates Boccaccio’s reception of the Latin translation of Aristotle’ Rhetoric. Did Boccaccio have direct knowledge of the Aristotelian text? Or had it been mediated to him by Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae?
8
Welzel, Andreas, and Christopher W. Tindale. "The Emotions’ Impact on Audience Judgments and Decision-Making in Aristotle’s Rhetoric." In Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory, 193–207. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4041-9_13.
Full text
9
Copeland, Rita. "Living with Uncertainty: Reactions to Aristotle’s Rhetoric in the Later Middle Ages." In Uncertain Knowledge, 115–33. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1484/m.disput-eb.1.102146.
Full text
10
Costa, Iacopo. "Plurality of Redactions and Access to the Original: Editing John of Jandun’s Questions on Aristotle’s Rhetoric." In Lectio, 25–46. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols Publishers, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1484/m.lectio-eb.5.118722.
Full textConference papers on the topic "Aristotle’s triangle of rhetoric"
1
"Ethos, Pathos and Logos: Rhetorical Fixes for an Old Problem: Fake News." In InSITE 2019: Informing Science + IT Education Conferences: Jerusalem. Informing Science Institute, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.28945/4154.
Full textAbstract:
Aim/Purpose: The proliferation of fake news through social media threatens to undercut the possibility of ascertaining facts and truth. This paper explores the use of ancient rhetorical tools to identify fake news generally and to see through the misinformation juggernaut of President Donald Trump. Background: The ancient rhetorical appeals described in Aristotle’s Rhetoric—ethos (character of the speaker), pathos (nature of the audience) and logos (message itself)—might be a simple, yet profound fix for the era of fake news. Also known as the rhetorical triangle and used as an aid for effective public speaking by the ancient Greeks, the three appeals can also be utilized for analyzing the main components of discourse. Methodology: Discourse analysis utilizes insights from rhetoric, linguistics, philosophy and anthropology in in order to interpret written and spoken texts. Contribution This paper analyzes Donald Trump’s effective use of Twitter and campaign rallies to create and sustain fake news. Findings: At the point of the writing of this paper, the Washington Post Trump Fact Checker has identified over 10,000 untruths uttered by the president in his first two years of office, for an average of eight untruths per day. In addition, analysis demonstrates that Trump leans heavily on ethos and pathos, almost to the exclusion of logos in his tweets and campaign rallies, making spectacular claims, which seem calculated to arouse emotions and move his base to action. Further, Trump relies heavily on epideictic rhetoric (praising and blaming), excluding forensic (legal) and deliberative rhetoric, which the ancients used for sustained arguments about the past or deliberations about the future of the state. In short, the analysis uncovers how and ostensibly why Trump creates and sustains fake news while claiming that other traditional news outlets, except for FOX news, are the actual purveyors of fake news. Recommendations for Practitioners: Information systems and communication practitioners need to be aware of the ways in which the systems they create and monitor are vulnerable to targeted attacks of the purveyors of fake news. Recommendation for Researchers: Further research on the identification and proliferation of fake news from a variety of disciplines is needed, in order to stem the flow of misinformation and untruths through social media. Impact on Society: The impact of fake news is largely unknown and needs to be better understood, especially during election cycles. Some researchers believe that social media constitute a fifth estate in the United States, challenging the authority of the three branches of government and the traditional press. Future Research: As noted above, further research on the identification and proliferation of fake news from a variety of disciplines is needed, in order to stem the flow of misinformation and untruths through social media.